Wednesday 14 February 2018

A new approach

After Monday's disappointing lesson, I approached Tuesday's lesson a bit differently. I collected a variety of articles and videos for students to explore, and they had to come up with a verdict: not guilty, manslaughter, and second degree murder. Overwhelmingly, students believed that the correct verdict would have been manslaughter. I think they had an easier time with this, because it didn't involve the hard topic of race. That said, discussions of race and racism and the resulting injustices will never not be a part of my teaching.

I'm still concerned that some* students don't see that racism is a real problem in Canada. I am trying to understand that it can be difficult for people to see the benefits that their race affords them.  I am trying to understand that it can be difficult for people to see that our beloved Canada has numerous systemic and institutional problems. I am trying to understand that it can be difficult for people to believe that it's not just their hard work that they're successful, but rather the situation they were born into gave them a head start.

It's much easier to believe the racism is a problem elsewhere (ie. the United States); it's much harder to believe that racism is a problem in your own country.

As many people have encouraged me, it's important to make students aware of the hard truths, and trust that one day their perspectives will change.

__________________________

*I had a student tell me today that he did some of his own exploration on Reddit, and he was shocked and disgusted by the comments about Indigenous people. He then connected back to our class on Monday, and shared that he couldn't believe that some students believed the comments were "just trolling" and didn't mean anything.

Monday 12 February 2018

When your lesson has too many errors for comfort...

In light of the Gerald Stanley verdict and the fact that my grade 11 classes are learning about modern Indigenous issues in Canada via The Outside Circle, I decided that our "Article and/or Video of the Week" (AVoW) would be focussed on Colten Boushie's murder. Despite having a relatively natural entry point, I wasn't sure how to approach the subject. I knew that some of my students would believe that Stanley acted appropriately, as Boushie and his friends were trespassing and attempting to steal. Additionally, some of them, last week, told me that the only reasons stereotypes exist is because I (and others like me) talk about the stereotypes. They believe that if we just didn't talk about stereotypes, they wouldn't exist.


I spent a lot of time over the week-end figuring out how I was going to bring the topic into the classroom, reading articles and watching videos. I considered waiting to discuss the trial at the end of our unit on The Outside Circle, because then students would have a better understanding of the ongoing impacts of colonialism and racism in Canada. My first error was not going this route.

Instead, I chose to show the clip "Racial tension front and centre at Colten Boushie Trial". I chose this clip because it predated the outcome of the trial and because it gave voice to both sides: the reporter spoke with Boushie's uncle and farmers from the area. I gave the students the following "look-fors": Colten's uncle's thoughts; fallout from the possible verdicts; Facebook comments; farmers' perspectives; role of communication.

After the video, I shared that Stanley was found not guilty of murder in the death of Boushie, and that the Stanley's defence did not focus on Stanley defending his property, but rather "hang fire". I also included that Boushie had been shot in the head. The discussion went smoothly until we got to the Facebook comments, which are racist. We unpacked what these comments meant, and I mentioned that there were many more comments of a similar vein on various websites. Here comes my second error; students asked if there were any racist comments against white people and I responded with something along the lines of "racism against white people isn't real". (This is an idea that deserves more unpacking and nuanced discussion, and I did it a disservice in my offhand comment.)

Here comes my third error. A student asked if I had any proof of the multitude of racist comments being posted. Obviously there are, but I just used the first article that I found and all of the racist comments were from the same person, so my point fell apart. Then class was over. (I have since compiled a sampling of the racist comments, but I don't know if it is something to bring back up in class tomorrow.)

Fortunately, I teach grade 11s the next period, so I had the insight from my errors to change the course of the class. We watched the videos with the same look-fors, but in the discussion, I spent a lot of time listening to the students and asking them questions to have them clarify and, hopefully, challenge their thinking. From what I understand, from the students who spoke, they don't think race had anything to do with either the shooting or the verdict. Nor do they think that racism or bullying is a problem.

I'm not entirely sure how I'm going to address my classes tomorrow. We need to finish our writing for the AVoW video. After that, I'm not sure. Do I just move along with The Outside Circle? Do I need to apologize for my errors? Do I explain my errors? Do I have them read this post? Do I discuss bias, my bias, and that my goal is for them to be open to other ideas, even when the ideas are uncomfortable or outside their lived experience? Do I need to set a goal for myself to be open to various interpretations even if I believe they are racist? Should I try to address the trial once we're done The Outside Circle? Do I have them do some independent exploration of the trial?

Edited:

Here is a link to my plan for tomorrow. (Still a work in progress.)