EDUC 606-Reflection
The research I undertook in this study was fundamental to my interventions in this action research and a critical component of professional development. The cultural inquiry process (CIP) was a necessary and worthwhile lens for me as an educator and a researcher. The exploration of both my cultural lens and the lenses of others was extraordinarily helpful to my research and future practice.
The CIP was a tool that enabled me to look at the issues confronting the diversity of learners that are in today’s schools. Without this awareness and respect it would be too easy to recline on cultural self-comfort. I was very fortunate that as part of my licensure process I was able to take courses on, for example, the Chicano Child, and Intercultural Communication. However, the framework where we hang our attitudes and beliefs, and our
responses to the children based on that framework, was never addressed. We were taught about the children in
our classes but our personal interaction with various cultures was missing. The CIP is important as a means to
illuminate to educators the necessity of personal awareness in our responses to students and all the other stakeholders in the education of that child.
Many of the issues confronting education today are largely a result of people talking past each
other due to their assumptions and cultural miscues. Multiple perspectives allow the educator to better address the needs in the classroom. It also allows the educator to better understand the reactions and impulses of those around any child’s educational process. The conclusion of this action research helped me to realize that much of the misunderstandings that occur in many of our social interactions not only inside, but also outside the classroom are due to cultural mismatches and assumptions.
This does not discount the real and fundamental needs and problems that exist in education. Racism, sexism, and
classism do exist. The need for social justice is still real. To be mindful of culture is not an excuse. However, much of the “soft racism” that I encountered during this study is not due to an intended agenda to do harm. Much of the racism I saw in the course of this action research was due to a flabby, “patch on”, make-due daily
operating procedure.
This is why one of my interventions was a grant from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Real change can only occur through social justice action by teachers on behalf of their students and others interested in change to benefit
children. Teachers can and should be change agents collaborating with other teachers, parents, and other stakeholders. (ASTL Learning Outcome 7) In order for this real change to occur in the identification process
there needs to be collaboration between stakeholders in order to apply pressure
to districts to change policy.
Knowing this enables an educator to make the point to stakeholders that the understanding of a student and all aspects of their culture, including language, are fundamental to classroom praxis and not just a nod to
multiculturalism. This is why, after my last interview, I knew I had to change my interventions. Professional development needs to occur as a first step in identifying the child of potential. The research and data I collected, as part of my professional development, are critical components of change in anyone’s praxis.
ASTL Learning Outcomes 1 and 7 are tied in this process. If teachers are committed to students and their learning then it is incumbent on educators to learn about a child’s culture and tap in to those “funds of knowledge” that each child brings to the classroom. It is also the obligation of the other stakeholders in that teacher’s sphere of influence to support that teacher in their professional development so that they can better
meets the needs of their students.
This action research made it easier to understand where and how information can be gleaned to further
meet the needs of students. An intimate knowledge and appreciation of each child’s culture is fundamental to
classroom pedagogy and practice. A child isolated from the dominant culture, and who finds it hostile, will not
learn regardless of the skill of the teacher in other areas.
This isolation can exist throughout a person’s life and touch many relationships inside and outside of school. This became very real to me during this class when my uncle died and my mother and I drove to her hometown for his
funeral. My uncle was an unabashed racist and so he and I had very little to say to each other as I saw him the few
times I was growing up. He was a small-town farmer and I was raised in Los Angeles.
My mother and I drove, and talked, and arrived at my mother’s best friend from high school’s house. I heard
words that weekend that I knew would make me cringe, but I also knew I had to be there for my mother. It was during my uncle’s funeral that I realized our relationship wasn’t so
simple.
During the services I heard person after person stand up and testify to the warmth, neighborliness, and kindness of this man I had found rebarbative my whole life. He was a leader in his culture, his community, and was deeply loved by the small-town where he had lived his whole life. I had taken Ogbu and Simons (1998) with me as my reading and felt very self-satisfied with myself for being so educated in these matters. Little did I know that my uncle, in death, would teach me that culture, and the language and mores that go with it,
are not to be determined or deemed acceptable by
me.
I may find something, or someone, different but it is not my job to judge. It is my job to educate and evaluate using appropriate tools based in research, and not my personal biases. It is my responsibility to understand and work with anyone, any student, on their own terms, and in way they can understand. Am I going to use my uncle’s racist language to interact with a student? Absolutely not! My culture finds that aberrant. At the conclusion of this class, however, I will be able to have a better understanding of meeting students where they are and working with them and their families as we build responsive pedagogy from there.
The CIP was a tool that enabled me to look at the issues confronting the diversity of learners that are in today’s schools. Without this awareness and respect it would be too easy to recline on cultural self-comfort. I was very fortunate that as part of my licensure process I was able to take courses on, for example, the Chicano Child, and Intercultural Communication. However, the framework where we hang our attitudes and beliefs, and our
responses to the children based on that framework, was never addressed. We were taught about the children in
our classes but our personal interaction with various cultures was missing. The CIP is important as a means to
illuminate to educators the necessity of personal awareness in our responses to students and all the other stakeholders in the education of that child.
Many of the issues confronting education today are largely a result of people talking past each
other due to their assumptions and cultural miscues. Multiple perspectives allow the educator to better address the needs in the classroom. It also allows the educator to better understand the reactions and impulses of those around any child’s educational process. The conclusion of this action research helped me to realize that much of the misunderstandings that occur in many of our social interactions not only inside, but also outside the classroom are due to cultural mismatches and assumptions.
This does not discount the real and fundamental needs and problems that exist in education. Racism, sexism, and
classism do exist. The need for social justice is still real. To be mindful of culture is not an excuse. However, much of the “soft racism” that I encountered during this study is not due to an intended agenda to do harm. Much of the racism I saw in the course of this action research was due to a flabby, “patch on”, make-due daily
operating procedure.
This is why one of my interventions was a grant from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Real change can only occur through social justice action by teachers on behalf of their students and others interested in change to benefit
children. Teachers can and should be change agents collaborating with other teachers, parents, and other stakeholders. (ASTL Learning Outcome 7) In order for this real change to occur in the identification process
there needs to be collaboration between stakeholders in order to apply pressure
to districts to change policy.
Knowing this enables an educator to make the point to stakeholders that the understanding of a student and all aspects of their culture, including language, are fundamental to classroom praxis and not just a nod to
multiculturalism. This is why, after my last interview, I knew I had to change my interventions. Professional development needs to occur as a first step in identifying the child of potential. The research and data I collected, as part of my professional development, are critical components of change in anyone’s praxis.
ASTL Learning Outcomes 1 and 7 are tied in this process. If teachers are committed to students and their learning then it is incumbent on educators to learn about a child’s culture and tap in to those “funds of knowledge” that each child brings to the classroom. It is also the obligation of the other stakeholders in that teacher’s sphere of influence to support that teacher in their professional development so that they can better
meets the needs of their students.
This action research made it easier to understand where and how information can be gleaned to further
meet the needs of students. An intimate knowledge and appreciation of each child’s culture is fundamental to
classroom pedagogy and practice. A child isolated from the dominant culture, and who finds it hostile, will not
learn regardless of the skill of the teacher in other areas.
This isolation can exist throughout a person’s life and touch many relationships inside and outside of school. This became very real to me during this class when my uncle died and my mother and I drove to her hometown for his
funeral. My uncle was an unabashed racist and so he and I had very little to say to each other as I saw him the few
times I was growing up. He was a small-town farmer and I was raised in Los Angeles.
My mother and I drove, and talked, and arrived at my mother’s best friend from high school’s house. I heard
words that weekend that I knew would make me cringe, but I also knew I had to be there for my mother. It was during my uncle’s funeral that I realized our relationship wasn’t so
simple.
During the services I heard person after person stand up and testify to the warmth, neighborliness, and kindness of this man I had found rebarbative my whole life. He was a leader in his culture, his community, and was deeply loved by the small-town where he had lived his whole life. I had taken Ogbu and Simons (1998) with me as my reading and felt very self-satisfied with myself for being so educated in these matters. Little did I know that my uncle, in death, would teach me that culture, and the language and mores that go with it,
are not to be determined or deemed acceptable by
me.
I may find something, or someone, different but it is not my job to judge. It is my job to educate and evaluate using appropriate tools based in research, and not my personal biases. It is my responsibility to understand and work with anyone, any student, on their own terms, and in way they can understand. Am I going to use my uncle’s racist language to interact with a student? Absolutely not! My culture finds that aberrant. At the conclusion of this class, however, I will be able to have a better understanding of meeting students where they are and working with them and their families as we build responsive pedagogy from there.