Warning: This is pretty long
Reflections and notes about my time in Practicum, and links to Invite! Excite! Ignite! Guiding Questions:
I also see a lot of evidence of empowering students (motivational messages p. 107) in Mr. Welch’s class on a day to day basis. He has assigned weekly roles for students, such as door holders, line leaders, classroom helpers, etc., that allow all students to engage in class activities and feel like leaders. He also constantly points out points of improvement, positive efforts and also little details to show each student he is interested and proud of them. Even writing small post it notes to really highlight a good behavior or a good day, for any student, is an incredible tool to foster enthusiasm and intrinsic motivation. That is something I know I will try to consciously keep going in my practicum. What really struck me in the reading was the short section talking about the growth mindset versus fixed mindset. We talked about this last year in several classes and it makes sense, but I can see real applications in this grade 4/5 class right now. The overall stability and health of the class depends on all the students engaging on a topic and finding some measure of success, however, the ability of individual students to reach that idea of success is so varied it seems almost impossible. Each activity we’ve done so far, is met by a handful of students who almost melt down and disengage for various reasons; too low comprehension level, lack of activity specific skills, lack of communication skills, lack of self regulation, behavioral issues, lack of concentration, poor attitude, etc. I found this quite daunting, as my grade 8 class last year was much more resilient. The low level students had become accustomed to being “low level” and had developed coping mechanisms and I could allow them to push themselves at their own pace. These students now however, have none of those skills (and also bitterness and jadedness, which is GOOD! They still expect to succeed and grow!!!), and therefore get discouraged and angry much easier. How do you manage that, with one teacher and 24-26 students? How do you manage that with some students about to explode or meltdown at any negative stimulus or provocation? This was the reason Mr. Welch told me this cohort was going to be extremely challenging at the start of the year. But, this reading, and my own observations, I had a kind of an “Ah-ha!” moment. What I really want, and need to do, is instill this idea of growth mindset in these students. Not in a broad, you can do anything way, because that is a little disingenuous, and they already see through that. But in a positive, reinforcing, and nurturing way, that says to them, “Hey, you have a lot of strengths, and we can build on those, and your weaknesses, we can build on those as well! We’re a team, and we’re going to succeed together.” I know that’s the message Mr. Welch has been trying to portray and demonstrate in the class, but it’s hard to keep that at the forefront when math drills, or reading skills are soo badly needed. This all reminded me of a Malcolm Gladwell book (or podcast, can’t remember which one) that I read, which detailed a study that tracked the success levels of students in an Ivy League school. In a nutshell, students in a class were asked a simple question, how many of them had concrete, defined goals? How many of them had those goals physically written out. It was a very small percent. How many had those goals in their minds, easily thought of? A larger, but still small percent. How many had vague goals, they kind of knew, but couldn’t succinctly articulate? That was the majority, who kind of had an idea of what they wanted. The study tracked the success of these students, and found that unanimously, the very same students who wrote down their goals, who had committed them to physical pen and paper, were all in the top 5% in academics, and went on to be in the top 5% for salary earnings and landing the best jobs. And the inverse was true of those people who had not formulated concrete goals. It’s such a simple idea, to manifest your goals and objectives and make them real, and to force yourself to interact with them on a daily basis. I thought about this looking around the classroom, and I thought, we have their names, slightly decorated, taped to their desks, to show which is their spot. It’s nice, shows a little ownership, but why not extend that? Why not have them create a list of 3 goals for the year, maybe 3 things they want to accomplish, or 1 learning goal, 1 social goal, and 1 personal goal, or any form of goal setting, maybe even list a weakness they want to improve, and have that there, physically before them. That could be tied into the moment of silence every morning. Or a morning reflective exercise, where students think about how they are going to accomplish those goals today, how they are going to improve each and every day. That kind of thoughtful exercise builds a growth mindset, it also builds deeper learning, encourages metacognition, and leads to intrinsic motivation. It felt like I had stumbled on a great, simple way of tapping into those concepts, but in a way grade 4s and 5s could relate to. This could be a life skill I could share with them which would have a lasting impact (hopefully!!) on their entire academic careers. I also wanted to tap into another idea I had these past few weeks, this one given by Wes in Shari’s class. The idea was a simple group check in each morning, where every student rates how they are on a scale of 1-5, and can add some justifications if they want. Students are also allowed to ask questions, to develop empathy, understanding, and also share each others joys or burdens. It’s a wonderful idea, and something so rarely used in classes. I remember my own experiences teaching pledge classes for my fraternity (please don’t judge too harshly). But one of the most important and beneficial practices we had was called candle pass, where we turned off the lights, and each person in the small group (usually around 7-14), was given time to reflect on how they were emotionally, mentally, physically, spiritually, and just share anything that was important to them. It was incredible, to connect with these people on such a deep level, learning personal details, struggles, goals, anything, and doing so in such a safe environment. This was designed to create a real sense of community and bonding within us. I don’t think a candle pass of that depth would be possible, but something quicker, with the same intentions would be incredible to increase the overall mental health of the class. Soo many of the students have already amazed me by their maturity and ability to empathise with each other. I’ve seen students in this grade 4/5 class, who I thought had severe behavioral issues, calm down, comfort another student, and tell them they understood and forgave them, because they also struggled with anger or frustration. That’s something MOST adults are incapable of, and here was a grade 4 putting themselves out there, being vulnerable and admitting their own mistakes to help another (usually someone they had just been fighting with moments before!). I want to bring that attitude of reconciliation, of repairing relationships, more into the classroom. I think at least a weekly check in and check out with the students would give them all a platform to share and become closer. The last thing I want to touch on is the main theme of Chapter 12, which is Believing in students and their potential. This is something I’ve been blown away by in Mr. Welch’s class, and that’s the strength of some of the students, who I didn’t see as strong or overly gifted, who have persevered through tasks and challenging assignments, and who constantly put themselves out there. There is one girl in particular, a soft spoken student, who always, ALWAYS has her hand up to volunteer a response, or help in the class or participate and show her support for Mr. Welch or myself. I don’t want to name her, but it’s something worth mentioning because she has a great deal of challenges and adversity in her own life, and yet she has a genuine love for school, for her peers and for learning. I’ve been impressed by the high level of some of the students, but this one girl has impressed me like no one else. She also made me keenly aware that those types of students, who try and work diligently, need as much attention, and deserve as much attention, as the one’s who act out or have more obvious challenges. That is another lesson Mr. Welch has helped me understand, is taking the time to ensure ALL students, especially the one’s who you often miss, the one’s who are okay on their own, doing good work, self motivated, need to be connected with, so they feel just as important as the high level student who gets the best marks, and the students who are always in trouble and by nature, require a lot of 1 on 1 time or discipline. This one student, and that notion of believing in a student’s potential, makes me want to create more dynamic, more interesting lessons, because I know she will appreciate it, I know the time and effort will be well spent. It’s a wonderfully motivating and inspiring feeling, but also one laden with expectation and work. It’s daunting to know that helping these students requires every ounce of our talent, forethought and energy, and even that is often not enough, but we have to be as diligent as we expect them to be, and continually strive to improve and develop as teachers. Alright, I feel like I rambled A LOT on this post, and maybe I got carried away at the end. I’ve definitely been dealing with my own burnout and ups and downs recently, and to be honest, I think I’m more nervous about this practicum than my first, but this last little bit here at the end, helped me find my legs again, so maybe I’m moving in the right direction. I know you won’t hear it a lot Linda, but I appreciate having to do these reflections and posts because it does force me to deal with what I’m really thinking about and where my heads at, so thank you for that.
0 Comments
Reflections and notes about my time in Practicum, and links to Invite! Excite! Ignite!
Guiding Questions:
Another element was seeing how some students responded to different situations/stimuli and what their strengths and weaknesses were. Even without having access to direct IEP’s, I could see Mr. Welch assessing students levels and trying to see how differentiation could work in the classroom. Strong students, weaker ones, but more importantly, how they worked together, who could collaborate, what group work looked like, how fights devolved and escalated. Who hated who, who liked who, who was good in the mornings, restless after lunch. All the nuances that can make or break a lesson or unit if not carefully accounted for and planned for. I was fortunate enough to also spend a little time asking advice from Laura Eagles, who is a wealth of knowledge on many of the students and how to help accommodate and reach some of the more demanding students. I will admit though, I am worried that some of my observations will influence or maybe jade me before practicum. I don’t want to discount some students because I’ve seen them misbehave, struggle or cause issues in the class. I want to approach each lesson with the same enthusiasm and passion as if they were a fresh class of 25 eager young minds, and not discount anyone before trying. That is a risk in working with the students so closely, and yet, I believe it is also realistic. Mr. Welch has been very candid with me about the challenges and issues of this cohort, of which students have a history of violence, acting out, anxiety, etc. I am glad though that already, I feel I could help some of them, that by supporting Mr. Welch’s teaching style and trying to work in tandem, have been to fill in some of the gaps when he can’t be everywhere at once. Similarly, I have found out some of the interests of the class, especially the individual students who needed more help, and I hope to bring that into my lessons so that student engagement and enthusiasm stays strong leading towards the Christmas break. As for the readings, I believe that ties in directly to many of the things I saw in Mr. Welch’s class. He began with a real focus on student success, and identifying student success as a classroom goal for everyone to participate in. He had the students engage with the learning skills portion of the report cards, outlying why they appear before metrics of learning and understanding and how that was by design, stressing that those 6 components are the real reason they are here and that is what learning should focus on at all times. This of course ties into deep learning and lifelong learning. The class, as I mentioned, is quite challenging. But those challenges just mean we have to focus and provide even more support for learning skills. Many of the students are very capable, wonderfully bright and unique, but lack the skills to develop on their own. They lack independence, organization, interpersonal skills, meta-cognition, self direction, stress management, goal setting, and tons of other small lessons and skills that we should be focusing on. I found it refreshing that throughout all the different subjects, from art, math, language and everything in between, Mr. Welch kept bringing up those learning skills as points to reinforce, as items to focus on. I hope that my own teaching style will focus on those elements as well. In my art lesson on 1 point perspective, I naively thought the students would eat up the first activity and run with it. I knew they were all capable, but I didn’t take into account the differences in those learning skills. Normally strong students broke down and cried, tore up pictures in frustration and completely shut down. I was mortified and embarrassed. I had set up these students to fail in a way they couldn’t handle. I didn’t give the scaffolding and gradual release to make sure they could all succeed in that activity. Talking with Mr. Welch afterwards and reflecting on it, I knew I took their enthusiasm and eagerness to learn from me for granted, and Mr. Welch and I both decided I needed to rectify that mistake. Going back in, I focused on modeling the lesson so that everyone, despite their level, could succeed and feel more confident. Some students still struggled, but Mr. Welch and I were then able to give them one on one support and ease the transition. I definitely felt that the second time, I was more focused on the learning goals and the life skills the students really needed, and it was a much better learning experience for everyone involved, the students and myself. That is a lesson and a focus I will definitely keep at the forefront of all future planning. So, it's been a while, part of me almost missed writing these blog posts . . . until I had to do one. That being said, this chapter of Ayers was quite enjoyable and informative because it highlights several key areas of pedagogical debate, assessment controversy and general teaching practices which are called into question. Namely, assessment, grouping students by ability level (or lack of ability), and standardized testing.
Throughout all my courses so far in the B.Ed program, I've been searching for concrete, hard facts and truths about these topics, and have really only been met with opinions, changing stories, or very circumstantial evidence. Assessment seems to have moved away from uniform methods of assessing students and turns towards malleable evaluations which accommodate different abilities, strengths or challenges. That doesn't seem too negative, and Ayers own structure, allowing the 3 P's (performance, projects and portfolios) allows students to be evaluated with methods which accommodate their abilities. I don't have any major qualms with that, as long as it remains within the spirit of what needs to be assessed and evaluated and does not allow for so much variance that all we are really doing is finding ways for students to be reassured and coddled. An example of that would be moving so far away from writing skills, because a student shows difficulty in that area, so as the final method of evaluation shows no evidence of that initial skill which was supposed to be developed and learnt. Now onto the juicy stuff. First, standardized testing. I've heard numerous and varied arguments for and against standardized testing. In our 3121 class, I went as far to being the most extreme supporter of the value of standardized testing, defending them as necessary elements of education. The reason I did that, an opinion distinctly unpopular with my classmates, was because I believe standardized tests are powerful tools and can provide incredible insight into what is going on in classes, overall trends, small anomalies, and call to attention areas of education which otherwise would be in the dark. However, I believe that the dangers, risks, problems arise from the USE of that data, how it is interpreted, stressed, focused on, taught, and everything else surrounding the test. I'll use an analogy to try and flush this idea out more. Let's say we have a population of animals, maybe deer in a given area. We are concerned about the deer, curious how healthy they are, are they moving, increasing, decreasing, etc. So we can send an airplane, and take an aerial photo of the deer in their environment. A snapshot of how they are. For me, that's standardized testing in it's pure, ideal form. However, let's say, we had special interests groups, who wanted to show that the deer are suffering. So a week before the photo is taken, some activists go out, herd the deer outside of the area, and then when the photo is taken, it shows a decrease in the deer population. Or vice versa, people coralling more deer into the area. Or giving the deer more food before the photo so they will appear healthier, and then denying them food after when it is not needed. That's basically what standardized testing, and the mess surrounding it is. If we place too much emphasis on them, grade schools by performance, punish students who perform poorly, over interpret the data, all those issues, those come as external positives or negatives. So for me, if we acknowledge the limitations and purpose of the test, we can use them simply as snapshots of what might be going on, and not as definitive proofs of progress or failure. Ayers takes a very anti-standardized testing stance in his comic, and it seems to stem from the biased, rigid format and how limited that format might be fore real assessment value. That makes sense since the US system, much like ours in some ways, places too much emphasis on those test results and is obsessed with scores. The test he took might be a good indication of how adjusted those teacher candidates were to sample problems, or cultural/linguistic situations that might be common in some US schools. I think his criticisms are valid, but not the be all or end all on that subject. I don't know if Ayers will revisit the idea of grouping his students in reading groups based on level. I've heard numerous different opinions on this teaching practice, lower level students benefit from interaction with higher level students, or the opposite, or split grade classes are great for quality education, or split grade classes are impossible to really address all the students needs, etc etc. Even now as we start new classes, I hear contradictory ideas. I've seen both in practice, students being grouped with like able'd classmates. Sometimes they pull together, become more engaged, sometimes it holds them back, limits their potential. Sometimes higher level students gain more by explaining and leading by example. Sometimes they learn more by being challenged and pushed by their peers. Honestly, choosing which is the best seems impossible. Even in Ayers own comic, while the word has come down from the administration and staff, it seems he's not quite sure where to stand. He does it, and groups his students by Gold, Silver or Bronze levels, but the children are depicted with confused, unsure and skeptical faces. Even they are uncertain of how appropriate or beneficial this will be. I'm hoping Ayers will flush out how these groupings work later on. Right now it seems that it's just accepted as something that needs to be done, but I have mixed feelings. Every time I step into a classroom, and have to broaden my teaching to reach ability ranges over 4, 5 or even 6 grade levels, I know the quality of my teaching is suffering. Trying to create learning opportunities, activities, etc for students at a grade 8 level, while also for others at a grade 2 or 3 level, leaves me frustrated and discouraged. However, when I get to work with a small group, and they are all at the same level, we definitely make more progress and I feel that real, concrete learning is happening. But that is just one isolated incident. More and more I'm finding that differentiation, IEP's and the reality of more split grade classes, less teacher support and all the other harsh realities of actually teaching in Ontario are daunting beyond belief. But mixed in with that hesitation and nervousness are the moments of reaching students and feeling the joy of inspiring learning. Feels like quite a long way to go before I can really pass judgement on all these things (if we ever get there). So that was a nice Chapter where basically all you need to know is; don't be married to the curriculum and don't let it limit your teaching, or your students (and your) learning.
Right ... what else to say beyond that? Pretty pictures? What's interesting is that Ayers puts the curriculum and inquiry based learning as two opposing forces, two sides of a coin, when in reality, you can take a balanced approach that has both supplementing and supporting each other. The "Curriculum" is often criticized for being too rigid, focusing only on test scores, and limiting the learning potential of students. Yes, that can be true, but that's more a reflection of the school board, the province or governing body, and the values of education in a society. Our current curriculum, while heavily based in results, fundamentals and expectations, does allow for teachers to approach lessons in creative, intuitive ways. It's a road map, and how you reach the destination is a reflection of your pedagogy and philosophy as a teacher. And let's be honest, even if you are super rigid, even if you are an old school, nose to the books, rote learning kind of teacher, there are some students who will love that and benefit from it. Education, as Ayers points out over and over, is different for every student, and their needs are never going to be uniform. So we shouldn't just assume that creative, out of the box, progressive ideas are better, as just we shouldn't judge established practices as superior either. My guess is Ayers Curriculum chapter is designed to show alternatives or debunk some of the old stereotypes that might still linger in the corner of some schools. But effective teachers, regardless of what curriculum they are involved in, will find ways to impart that information in accessible, interactive and engaging ways. The Lesser Blessed was a dark and probing film looking at the age old problems of teenage rebellion, trying to fit in, identity and being an outcast. However, this are all approached from the lens of a remote town in the Northwest Territories, and from the eyes of an Indigenous boy, Larry, with a dark past. The film has some powerful moments, such as when Jed describes the heartbreaking and tragic deaths of a hunter and his family, and the improbably cruelty involved. What the film is doing, which I applaud, is not only trying to shed light on some of the issues surrounding modern, current Indigenous youth, and how the tortures of being bullied, growing up and ostracized are compounded and magnified when you're ever further marginalized by society. It also shows a marked trend of bringing real funding and production value to Indigenous films and issues, something which mainstream media has not done much of in the past (except in extremely racist and biased ways). For those reasons I applaud the movie.
Based on the movie, characters and events itself, I have to admit, I was less than overwhelmed. The film seems too formulaic, too enamored of archetypes, which end up being fairly one dimensional and obvious. Yes Larry has more to him, and is tortured by demons, far more intelligent than one would first assume, and struggling to balance his Native background with modern teenage life, but these are fairly common themes in a lot of movies, just not from the Native perspective. Images in the movie, like the strict, stern, useless teacher, or the lone wolf when Larry is running away, are too simple and overused. I guess I really didn't like some of the hollywood spin or gloss added to the narrative, as I think it makes it blend in with the expected norms of how characters should act and be portrayed. In some ways the quality of the film, the presentation, makes the underlying themes and real message almost harder to appreciate and identify. One very intersting thing to note, when I looked the film up online, sources like IMDB did a terrible job of describing the film, and summed it up with one line descriptions like "A drama centered on a First Nations teenager trying to find his place in the modern world." That is quite a useless and ridiculous plot synopsis, and it makes me think they didn't even watch the film. Even if I didn't enjoy it, I feel that addressing some of the actual issues in the movie would be useful. It's almost as if because it's a Native themed movie, they dismissed it and just summarized it like it didn't have anything interesting to say. Similarly, wikipedia had things like this to say: "The film explores several typical teen issues, such as alienation and the search for one's own identity, but in this case from the perspective of a Tlicho Indian who struggles between his Native ancestry and finding his place in to the modern world." What it doesn't mention, if you look deeper, is the search by a young Native Canadian to find meaning and grounding in his traditions and culture, through the figure of Jed, to balance the chaos and uncertainty he faces everyday. Those are not simple teenage angst themes or problems, as being Indigenous in remote areas is an added complexity. I'm not going to lie, I didn't really see the point in having this movie in the course, as it shows, with less efficacy I believe, the same issues and themes we've already been introduced to from other sources. It wasn't a bad film, but from the perspective of a teacher candidate, I really didn't feel it added much, beyond the typical ineffective teacher, a school which displays Native art all over it, but doesn't use any of the teachings and values, and students who have exceptionally difficult lives who need real help and guidance. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action Recently I was made aware of a cultural difference between how we in Western society use the word 'serious', and how it is interpreted and used in some parts of Africa. While we often use the word to distinguish between something light-hearted and something more grave, in Africa the word 'serious' is reserved to differentiate between something that is just talk, and when something is accompanied by an action or consequence (often in financial transactions). For example, we would say that something is a joke, and not to be so serious. They would use the word to say we're not just talking something, but rather that they are serious (meaning something concrete is happening, for sure). This small cultural and linguistic difference struck me as interesting, especially as Western politicians speaking in Africa were unaware of the distinction. A young reporter asked Senator John Kerry, after his speech, if his intentions were really in fact serious or not? Kerry, an overly serious and grave person, dismissed the question and didn't really understand the context of it. The reporter was really asking, all these things you are saying, for your involvement and commitment to African affairs, are they serious? Do they carry actual economic sanctions, military backing, etc, or are they simply words? The readings this week brought this distinction back to the forefront of my thoughts, as I really had to consider whether these documents, commissions and recommendations from the Canadian government were in fact serious, that they accompanied real action, or were they simply words spoken in a grave tone. Beginning with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's Call to Action, I found the language and aim of the document quite positive and forward moving for Indigenous affairs. The commission identifies a lot of key factors, moving beyond simple economic reparations, that need to be changed in Canadian culture, society and politics; such as increased funding towards Indigenous language programs, matching the educational rights and funding of all Indigenous and First Nations Canadians whether they are on reserves or not, and developing a curricula that is focused on Indigenous and First Nations issues, history and values. Now, these are definitely positive steps, and the Call to Action document is quite exhaustive and thorough. Some parts however, are listed as goals, but really are complex issues that require more than simple identification, and these relate to the deep rooted, systemic problems Canada has created for our First Nations, Metis and Inuit citizens. For example; under the Education section, it states: 10. We call on the federal government to draft new Aboriginal education legislation with the full participation and informed consent of Aboriginal peoples. The new legislation would include a commitment to sufficient funding and would incorporate the following principles: i. Providing sufficient funding to close identified educational achievement gaps within one generation. ii. Improving education attainment levels and success rates. [...] Both parts of this i. and ii. are important and should be focused on, but that wording, and what it requires is so vague and inconsequential compared to the actual nuances of the issues. "Improving education attainment levels and success rates." How is that done? How much funding is needed? How much money, if thrown at the issue, will it take? How much improvement is needed to be deemed acceptable? And most importantly, how do we improve those levels, is it through tutoring, longer school hours, more strict attendance policies, more teachers, smaller classes, better technology, more schools? Having the wording be vague is appropriate on some levels, as it allows for the spirit of the recommendations to be explored and developed on a case by case basis. However, it also leaves the possibility for ambiguity and a lack of accountability in the end. If some effort is put forward, and things improve slightly, then is that a success? I believe the criteria for a lot of these issues needs to be more rigorous and developed. The measures put forward to combat these inequalities, especially in education, need to be serious and not simply lip service. Perhaps then, beyond the specific calls to action within this report, the most important issue would be to have a call to action for Canadians, within government and citizens as well, to put First Nations, Metis and Inuit concerns on par, and equal to all other concerns and place priority on resolving these issues above others. That perhaps would be the best indication of how serious the Government of Canada and it's people are about Indigenous rights and affairs. Part of that stems from the effort being put into education and acknowledging the crimes of the past. The section on Education for Reconciliation is therefore one of the key sections where the ultimate success of this report and call to action rests upon. By teaching, exposing and increasing the importance of Indigenous history, residential schooling and current First Nations issues, we change the cultural and political landscape of future Canadians, ensuring these topics get the attention they deserve. First Nations, Metis and Inuit Education Policy Framework What I found most interesting and compelling about this document was not simply the efforts, focus and aims education framework, but how it compares and contrasts with the TRC: Calls to Action report, especially noting the language and issues as they span an 8 year gap. What you find is that the same issues and concerns are being identified: drop out and retention, curriculum development, language protection, Indigenous values/history/culture being taught, access to education, etc. However this policy framework does have more concrete and specific goals and expectations, and lists much more defined paths for success. While I found the entire approach to be quite comprehensive, and the goals admirable, I wonder how effective it was, considering that 8 years later, the TRC releases its Calls to Action, which doesn't list anywhere to continue with the programs of success they have in place. How effective were these policy changes? And perhaps, the most crucial element for me is wondering, when will these policy changes be implemented into the actual curriculum, some of the documents being even before this policy framework came out? In order for a lot more effective change, these topics need to be included in the curriculum itself for all students in Ontario, thereby guaranteeing that they are given priority and included actively by teachers. I believe that any initiatives towards further education that is not in the curriculum has the added obstacle of potentially being given less priority by teachers and school boards. What now amounts to locally developed courses or programs needs to be taken out of the dark, and put into the spotlight of curriculum design and education reform. Knockwood Chapter 10: Reactions to the Apology This Chapter of Knockwood is a response to the official government apology issued by Stephen Harper in 2008, on behalf of the Canadian Government for its role in residential schools. What emerges from her reaction, and what she observes, is a mixed, complex portrait on the divided and unsure nature of how First Nations people felt about the apology, what they expected and what they needed. This comes to the crux of this issue for me, beyond even the specifics of First Nations, Metis and Inuit in Canada, (and I know I've talked about this issue soo many times, and gone on and on ad nauseam) and that is what is required to move on from a tragic or traumatic event, how the survivors or victims interact with the perpetrators in the future, what responsibility/guilt is there, what is enough, what is fair, and what needs to happen to move on. This issue is so complex because it is a massive, widespread sweeping program that affected soo many lives, but it affected them all individually in different ways. So each and every person involved, each Indigenous person, their family, their community, will have different needs and wants moving through this. And also, everyone else involved, people who are involved as Canadians
Knockwood identifies this very issue, the mixed response from her community hearing the apology, the inability to communicate afterwards, seeing the way the apology actually seeded uncertainty and confusion. Before the apology there was more unity because the communities had their collective anger and disappointment. But now, afterwards, it splintered them, some felt relieved, some happy, some were still furious, some felt it was insulting or just lip service. They were no longer all on the same page, because each and every person needed something unique, and Stephen Harper seemed to be giving a very bland, general apology. I believe, as an outsider looking at this issue, I would have wanted Stephen Harper to have gone all the way on his apology, to take responsibility not just for being involved, but for the governments direct role, and how unforgivable those policies were and are. It seems more that the government is concerned with absolving guilt rather than doing what would be best for the relationship with Indigenous peoples in Canada. What I learned from Knockwood and her insights is that the real failure and disappointment of the government apology, albeit it being a step forwards at least, is that there was no real identification of what Indigenous people's really needed to move forwards, and if there was, it was not followed through. She mentions how Stephen Harper only addressed the Speaker of the House, how the 5 First Nations leaders present were not given a chance to respond, comment or be heard at all, these are both huge elements that could have been used to move towards reconciliation, towards real discussion and interaction, not simply relegating them as observers, with no power to influence their own fate. This is the recurring theme, the lack of power, ability, self determination given to First Nations, Metis and Inuit people. We identify their problems, we hypothesize solutions, steps to take, but real power, real change, is not given to them in the magnitude it needs to be. Coming back to my initial thoughts, this is just talk, it's speaking and acting without being "serious" in that all too crucial sense, serious in that our actions will back up, support and prove our words. There is slow progress, commission after commission, study after study, but why is it moving so slowly? Why are there still misconceptions by the average Canadians, stereotypes about the "lazy, drunk Indian", why are funds being mismanaged, why do we allow former Prime Ministers during their tenure to say things like "Missing Indigenous Women are not a priority?". How do we let these outrages continue, in the background, without speaking out and acting out against them? That comes down to the social/cultural shift that is still waiting to happen. This slow boil that continues below the surface, where everyone in Canada needs to become engaged, needs to care, and needs to decide to make First Nations, Metis and Inuit people a prioritized and valued part of Canada. Maybe our generation of new teachers is the exact thing Canada is waiting for, to undue and repair the damage of residential schools and hundreds of years of propaganda against Indigenous peoples. Maybe as these new programs are implemented, as students are given a clear and open view of Canadian history, we'll see a new Canadian identity emerge, one that values all of it's members, and is willing to take a firm stance on their behalf. That responsibility is on our shoulders now, definitely some food for thought and a serious conversation all potential teachers should be having. Well, it has been a while since there was a reading or movie which left me smiling and feeling good about becoming a teacher. While we haven't left the themes of Indigenous education, life and society, at least this weeks novel, The Absolute True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie brought some joy and laughs into my life. Now, don't be deceived, it's also a heartrending story, learning the situation of Spokane and countless other Indian people's, the realities of reservation life and how so many will never escape the cycle of poverty, violence and substance abuse. Those realities are there with all their blemishes, warts, vomit, boners and pimples. Nothing is held back, and that's what makes Alexie's novel so brilliant and captivating.
It contains the guilt, history and racism that plagues both the United States and Canada. The main character, modeled after Sherman Alexies own youth and experiences, suffers from all the plights of a normal adolescent growing up, crushes, masturbation, poverty, feeling isolated, but magnified 100 fold by his health problems from birth, his impoverished lifestyle, the reserve he lives on, his parents and families addiction problems, the stigma of being a smart, ambitious member of the tribe, and thousands of other influences. His will, his drive, and his honesty are inspiring. The adversity, hardship and cruelty life deals Arnold are more than most of us could bear. But life has also blessed Arnold in other ways, it blessed him with good (and flawed) friends, a family who supports and loves him unconditionally, an appreciation for life, a will to live and a drive to improve himself, and even a sense of justice and beauty. Life has made Arnold Savage strong enough and brave enough to face all those obstacles, and fall and stumble, but ultimately keep moving forwards. Now, there is something I will say that some people might find surprising. I did love the book. I did enjoy it thoroughly. But it was also not something new to me. What I mean is the writing style, the way it's presented, was not something that surprised or even really impressed me. I'm not saying this as a negative aspect, more as a positive one in fact. In truth this book reminded me A LOT of my favorite American author of all time, Kurt Vonnegut, who I believe pioneered this kind of bizarre, brutally honest, quick witted style that carries us through the novel so effortlessly. It's also the exact same style with the small cartoons and illustrations sprinkled throughout the novel. Again, I don't mean this as a negative detraction, just as an observation, and hey, the more Kurt Vonnegut inspired work out there, the better! If anything, using that style and tone made this novel into something unique. It is a story that Kurt Vonnegut, if he was here, could never tell himself, because it needed to be an honest account. Writers, at least the good one's, write about things they know, and Sherman Alexie knows the hardships of being a Native American in the United States. He knows the pain and suffering from growing up on reserves, from being a second class/third class citizen, he knows the shame and embarrassment that haunts people. Vonnegut wrote about the war, he wrote about being old and white and American, because that's what he knew. This is the new voice that needs to be heard now, and more and more, we need to get these varied voices out there. To expose youth and young adults to material which challenges them, opens their minds, exposes their preconceptions and bias'. Vonnegut for me was someone who revolutionized what a novel could be, he changed the role of storyteller from someone imparting information to someone opening a hole in their chest, and putting the contents on a page and letting you walk through it all with him. So in the end, this story was not just a challenge in life for one person, it is a challenge for us all to get out of our comfort zones, to shake off the preconceived notions of what we should be doing. Whether its being stuck on a reserve, or being a privileged person making fun of Native Americans, either way, we need to stop being assholes and dicks to each other (sorry, but I'm using language that Alexie would appreciate), because that's the bottom line now. We're educated enough to know what is fair. We are educated enough to know how people should be treated, what they should have, that hope is something Universal, and it's not just for white people or rich people. So let's stop letting the world continue that way. Let's stop being jerks and building invisible walls that separate Indigenous or poor people from the middle class. Let's stop filling our schools with stories about how great our European forefathers were, and tell stories about real people struggling today. About those trying to undo the wrongs of the past, which we ever so conveniently hide and mask. I will definitely be using this novel if I can as a teacher, and I encourage anyone who hasn't read it to try. Knockwood:
Reading Knockwood's Chapter 2, I can't help but feel completely drained, agitated and uncomfortable. I know that these topics, Residential Schools and the effects of Canadian Government policy and Catholic Church intervention, are horrific, and that learning about them won't be something enjoyable or nice, but still, I feel stretched thin, and the more I read, the more I feel myself screaming out for release or distraction. So I read a page or two, and stop. I let certain emotions and thoughts take hold of me for a moment, feel the tension rise up in my chest, and then I exhale loudly, deliberately, slowly, and take my mind somewhere else. It's too heavy. It's been too much exposure, too much pain to soak in these past two months. I've tried to expose myself to the realities of the past, to educate myself, become aware of the people and their suffering who went through this terrifying experience, but at the same time, it's slowly but surely worn me down. I don't mean this to sound like a criticism of the material or of our duty to educate ourselves. What I mean is that, throughout this teacher education program, we've mostly been on this 'empowering teaching high', where we've been learning new techniques, styles and methods of becoming better teachers. And I know a lot of that is hyped up, and the reality of teaching isn't always so rosy. We're also faced in the Urban Education program with a lot of harsh realities. Poverty, hunger, domestic issues, and everything else that factors into the daily realities of intercity kids. It's a lot to take in, but at least in that sense, we are arming ourselves to try and help them, to be aware of their situations and find ways to help them succeed in life. This however, is different. Perhaps its the guilt and shame that accompanies reading these kinds of personal accounts. Perhaps its the knowledge that there is so much still wrong with the system, and we are not addressing those needs. Or maybe even more discouraging to me, is that there are a lot of Canadians who either don't know about these events, or would rather remain ignorant, and actively dismiss them. Stereotypes, racial comments and ignorance abound in our supposedly 'enlightened' and 'egalitarian' society. I would like to say that I'm no stranger to reading sensitive material and controversial historical events. Through my undergraduate degree, I focused on Holocaust studies, and being confronted with those realities was shocking and harrowing, however, in that case, there was a sense of evil that allowed one to grapple with what happened. It was so brutal, so calculated, so despicable, that you could identify it, condemn it, and carry on knowing that people were doing everything they could to atone for those sins, and to make sure they never happened again. It didn't make any of it acceptable, but it made it comprehensible. This time however, there is too much denial, too much misinformation, and too much indifference. That is probably what I am having the hardest time dealing with. One of the moments which struck me the most from the Walking With Oour Sisters event I attended, was how similar the vamps were to the official coat of arms and shields on our provincial flags. It saddened me to think that our flags don't even represent the First Nations people who's land we live on, yet we treat our symbols and icons with such reverence and respect. I thought it would be such a good idea to change the Ontario flag to reflect our Indigenous and First Nations communities and replace elements of the flag which although proud for some people, have such negative connotations for so many others. The real underlying sickness in this Knockwood's story is not the horrific details, like the prison garb, the priests and sisters eating lavish meals while the children subsided on rotten potatoes, or even the beatings and physical trauma. The real sickness is that underneath all that is the sense of superiority, of intelligence and righteousness that pervades the 'Western Christian' mentality. The idea that they knew best, that they would save the souls of these children, and tear them away from savagery and barbarism. What scares me more is how much of that sentiment persists. How much of that outmoded, ignorant “We know better” attitude continues without people even knowing. I'm sure a lot of the people involved in residential schools really wanted to do good, and believed in their religious doctrines, but seeing them degrade to forcing a child to eat salted food until he throws up repeatedly, or beating other children to instill fear and order, those are unforgivable abuses of power. The only way I can read these stories and memoirs and feel something constructive, something positive, something to take away, is to acknowledge the spirit and resilience of those children. Even now, as some write and reflect years later, they look back upon their experiences as things to move on from, not to dwell in anger and frustration in. Even considering how horrific their childhoods became, there isn't an overpowering sense of revenge or retribution. They are saddened and confused why this needed to happen, but not poisoned by the events themselves. Even while their culture, language and identity was striped from them, their resilience and strength is remarkable. I felt that same power and energy from the women in the Walking With Our Sisters experience. Battiste: The reading from Battiste was the perfect companion piece to Knockwood's chapter, as it related issues in Indigenous relations, history and treatment to the state of education and popular perception within Canada at present. There was A LOT of information to digest, but a lot of it was incredibly insightful, illustrating the weaknesses and pitfalls of our current modern curriculum and mindset, which pervades and influences all aspects of our lives. One of the key ideas was education as the central matrix for undoing so much of the damage created by our Eurocentric society to Indigenous societies in Canada. This seems to be an increasingly difficult thing to do however, as Battiste points out, so many different aspects of our society are reflections of our Western mindset. Battiste points to the values we espouse in education, this meritocracy we uphold as the gold standard, and the consumerist world we later enter into, as crucial problems that Indigenous based education must combat. While I agree with the need for educational reform at the most basic and fundamental levels, addressing the very purpose and drive for education and knowledge, I wonder how do we change the bias that exists in our society and culture at large? This goes beyond simply negative stereotypes and challenges facing First Nations people, what I am talking about is the god like status our society has given to reason and logic. Those are, despite how our education system molds us, contrary principles to many of the teachings we should be encouraging. This can be thought of in terms of what kind of life is better? A holistic one, centered and based around community and relationships, or one driven by success, productivity and maximizing our potential? Those two shouldn't be mutualy exclusive choices, however our society has made them out to be. In order to “succeed” most people think it right, and often commendable, to sacrifice other valuable parts of our lives. Right now our lives are driven by desires, personal goals and vanity. And our culture places those on pedestals. Celebrity lifestyles, branding and social perception are the most valued commodities in today's world. How can we expect our education system to enact real change, to move beyond superficial goals, when the world we live in doesn't demand the same reform? A n enlightening point Battiste made which summarizes all of this was: “The assumptions are no longer formally acknowledged but still influence contemporary policies and modern variants.” and “[...] education theory has to confront the line between truth and propaganda.” For me, these identify the need for a real paradigm shift, in our approach to Indigenous peoples and relations, as well as societal values. I love books like Wade Davis' “The Wayfinders” which highlight and exemplify the knowledge and wisdom Indigenous cultures around the world can teach us, and how so called “primitive cultures” can be so far advanced morally and ethically over our Western lifestyle. Coupled with books like “Voltaire's Bastards” exposing the cult of reason we live in, it feels like there is soo much around us to change and tear down. I guess the entire thing falls into a kind of catch-22 however; do we start by changing the education and how we teach? Or does society and our values need to change first, so that our teachings can follow them? Ayers Chapter 4: Building bridges This was the most interesting chapter in Ayers so far (which just means it was really REALLY good). While like most points in Ayers graphic novel, it seems like very happy-go-lucky, optimistic, new age advice, however this time, I felt Ayers was moving more towards concrete examples of how to improve teaching. While the example of the class collaborating to build the turtles ramp is a wonderful example and metaphor for the entire process, I was much more interested in his sons quest for meaning as he entered adulthood. I'm not afraid to admit that I am not religious in any way, and often have great difficulty seeing the benefits in organized religions. While I believe religious ideas can be beneficial for people, I've always fought against organized religion and its need to assert power and dominance. However, I believe that what our secular society is missing more than anything, is meaningful ceremonies and rituals which bring a sense of community, importance and sanctity to events and life. I thought this idea of developing your own rite of passage was really ingenious and how beneficial and educational it would be. This should also be incorporated at a smaller level into the daily routine of education. From what I can tell, there seems to have been a move away from large group activities, celebrations or ceremonies at schools, and often the focus is solely on academics and some sporting events. I believe that similar to this coming of age quest, if students participated in more rituals that involved them, made their experiences important and created a sense of belonging, they would value education, school and learning a lot more. It's no secret that people who are engaged with a sense of purpose, accompanied with a sense of communal responsibility, take greater pride and onus for whatever they are involved in. Creating that sense of belonging and passion is what teaching should be about. Another point I latched onto from Ayers, which wasn't expressly shown in the comic, was that while some bridges need to be built, some may also need to be metaphorically broken down. What I mean is that we have certain predetermined or common ways of thinking, acting, or solving problems. We rely on established norms, finding comfort in repetition or so called “common sense”. However, where real innovation and discovery happens is when we challenge those norms, or simply evolve our way of thinking to something new. In a sense, this is what Ayers suggests we do, break out of the established bridges that link teachers to students, or curriculum to knowledge, and create new ones which develop education in a new, refreshing and productive way. Finally, I'll simply end of on a poem I remember from a memorable experience I had in my undergrad, which aptly enough was called: The Bridge Builder BY WILL ALLEN DROMGOOLE An old man going a lone highway, Came, at the evening cold and gray, To a chasm vast and deep and wide. Through which was flowing a sullen tide The old man crossed in the twilight dim, The sullen stream had no fear for him; But he turned when safe on the other side And built a bridge to span the tide. “Old man,” said a fellow pilgrim near, “You are wasting your strength with building here; Your journey will end with the ending day, You never again will pass this way; You’ve crossed the chasm, deep and wide, Why build this bridge at evening tide?” The builder lifted his old gray head; “Good friend, in the path I have come,” he said, “There followed after me to-day A youth whose feet must pass this way. This chasm that has been as naught to me To that fair-haired youth may a pitfall be; He, too, must cross in the twilight dim; Good friend, I am building this bridge for him!” What I loved about this poem, not only for the obvious reasons of helping others and leaving a lasting legacy rather than simply living for oneself, is that the old man is at the end of his life, about to die. This is poignant because it is often only when it is too late that we reflect on the value of life and what we've accomplished or regretted. This was a reminder to me, even as I was entering University and feeling on top of the world, of the fragility of it all, and how we should act and live in a way which creates a lasting legacy of happiness or love, something that builds towards the future, rather than focusing on arriving at a destination. This reminded me of my grandparents, poor immigrants to Canada, who through hard work and sacrifice provided for their family and flourished. They've never had a vacation, never treated themselves to a meal in a restaurant, because for them, saving and guaranteeing the well being of their family was everything. If we all lived a little more in that world, of caring for others before ourselves, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today. Alright, I'll stop myself before getting stuck on my soap-box, and leave it at that. Thank you for reading, I knew it was going to hurt, I knew it was going to be emotional and difficult to watch. I had braced myself beforehand, tried to wait until I was in a state where I thought I could watch the film and soak it in and not get too involved. I don't think 'We were children' is something I'll ever be truly ready to watch, and in a way, that's how it should be. I enjoyed the film, I loved it, but it's the kind of love that makes you cry and hate the world and leaves you wishing you knew what it was you had to do, what tangible action you could take, that would make a difference, that would comfort someone who had suffered those atrocities, instead of feeling helpless. (the film can be watched here: https://www.nfb.ca/m/playlists/5628bc597f1642cc93a1f36a33dc_de0c/playback#playlistcontainer) I guess in that sense I should be grateful that teaching is one of the ways we can change people's perspectives, help fix and repair the damaged educational system for First Nations, Metis and Inuit peoples, and also open the eye's of Canadians to this terrible, shameful part of our countries past. It does make me angry that there are people who still deny the impact and importance of what happened, and treat Indigenous Canadians as second class citizens who just get handouts. I do wish there had been more warning and discussion about the films contents before watching it. I did read the small explanation/bio on the NFB website, but even that didn't prepare me for the graphic and heavy nature of the film. It's a lot to take in, and part of it's power is the way it portrays the events themselves. I had forgotten, but two of my very close friends, one actually being my best friend, were involved in the filming of We Were Children, Jeremy Benning being the cinematographer, and Jason Vieira the B camera/steadycam operator. I was lucky enough to talk to Jeremy about his experience filming the movie and he shared some interesting insights with me. One thing that I did like hearing, was that the two girls who portrayed Lyna Hart were siblings, and both from the same tribe that Lyna was originally from, and that she actually came to visit them and interact during production. One sad thing about that was the younger girl didn't speak the actual language, so trying to have her speak during the film was difficult. It shows how much of the culture and language has been lost because of Residential schools and how those effects are still reverberating throughout communities. Also, one of the locations they filmed at actually was a former residential school, which is both haunting and interesting, and I can only imagine the feelings the crew and cast must have had going through that process within walls where those kinds of events actually took place. Another interesting part was that casting the younger actor who played Glen was really problematic and took a long time. The reason being that there are so few Indigenous children being sought for acting roles that there really wasn't anyone available. That shows you what our society values and that people who look Indigenous aren't even marketable or desirable unless we specifically need a 'Native child'. The young boy who was actually chosen didn't have any prior acting experience, and I think he did a remarkable job portraying such a hard and complex role. I guess one final note will be that I'm also sad to learn that Lyna Hart passed away this year, and as I'm learning about her now, she seems like she was a powerful, amazing woman, and I'm so glad her story and voice are being heard. When the film first opened, it didn't receive the attention it should have, as both CTV and CBC refused to air it, citing it was too heavy and shocking. But now at least it's also available on Netflix and apparently getting a lot of exposure that way. I definitely started out writing this wanting to just scream and yell and swear. A lot of swearing. I know a lot of other people felt that way as well. And I think that's important. We should be outraged, we should be upset and hurt and furious over what happened, how its been hidden and how its still not "a priority" for a lot of Canadians. I don't want to point out the suffering of others, I don't want to make them into a spectacle, to bring back painful memories, but I'm so glad and appreciative for people like Glen Anaquod and Lyna Hart, who's strength and humanity are humbling and awakening for all of us. [The film can be viewed here: https://www.nfb.ca/film/everybodys_children]
This will probably offend some people. I'm having a very hard time writing this response. I've stopped myself half a dozen times now, erased everything, pulled my hair in frustration, and came back to nothing again. So I'm just going to rant. I'm going to say some things that I'll probably regret, but whatever, it's probably the only way I'll get anything down and not immediately erase it. This is going to be a lot of pent up frustration. A lot of anger and bile and self loathing. I don't know how people can watch “Everybody's Children” without feeling incredibly angry, ashamed and depressed. I guess maybe if you shut out everything else in the film, and just focus on the personal progress of these two individuals, you might be able to say “Yeah, they're doing well, their lives are improving.” But that would be ignoring every other facet of reality around them. You would have to ignore the horror and absolute sadness of the lives they come from, of how messed up our world is to allow those situations to exist. You would have to ignore the reality that they are two extreme cases of chance and good fortune, that they got out, had people help them, somehow managed to escape, and not get sent back, and are resourceful enough to keep working, keep fighting, and survive. How many others in those situations are left behind, currently still suffering, without any chance of relief or change? How can you not think about that and not get extremely depressed and want to yell and cry about it? I know I can't. How can you watch this film without feeling guilty? Guilty for our privilege (I hate that word right now) that we take for granted everyday. Guilty for never considering how lucky we are, fortunate we are, to have basic things, safety, food, education, loving families, friends, freedom to speak, walk, act as we want? Dress as we want, believe what we want? I know we're not supposed to feel guilty for everything, that those are simply facts of life and beyond our control, but that doesn't stop that feeling deep in the pit of my stomach which turns and knots itself within me. Don't you get that feeling watching this film? Don't you feel guilty that this is probably the first time you ever thought about what a refugee might actually face coming to Canada? No support, government aid, language help, nothing? Just get off a plane and start being questioned? And here we talk about how amazing Canada is as a bastion and sanctuary for people. We (general opinion as far as I can tell) look down upon countries like America, who refuse more refugee's than us. Yeah ... aren't we great. It feels like that's such a hollow gesture, an image we propagate to make us all feel good about ourselves, a nice pat on the back, 'We're Canadian, did you know how amazing we are? We help people all over the world.” And yet none of us know the reality of that situation unless you've lived it. It almost feels like this giant collective lie we buy into, just like our amazing “multiculturalism” that we sell every chance we get. Hey, I don't mean to be completely pessimistic. Yes, we are better than some countries when it comes to helping others. Yes, we do some good things. And even if it's the bare minimum, I guess that counts for something, right? But it makes me feel ashamed that we could be doing so much more, and whats worse, is that we care more about selfish interests; music awards, celebrity gossip, fashion, all those other distractions that mean so little when you think about it, but spend zero time thinking about people on the fringes of society. People who genuinely need aid, want to be Canadian, dream of having the same opportunities as us. What bothers me even more is that I know, in a day, two days from now, I'll go back to all those other distractions. Because that's how easily it is to just forget these issues. Why be reminded of the ugliness and struggle of life when we can watch a movie, download a tv show, go shopping, indulge in gratuitous, instant satisfaction? Take pictures of our meals, check how many likes our posts get; all the ways in which we dull our minds and engage in this new pop culture consumerism. Our lives are built around ease and excess, and anything that doesn't fit in nicely conveniently gets ignored and brushed aside. I know I'm passing judgment on everyone. I know that's wrong of me as well. Who am I to decide what people should be concerned with? How full of myself am I to presume to know better, to understand what a meaningful life should entail? And you'd be right to call me a hypocrite and a liar and delusional. I'm just as bad as everyone else. If not worse. I sit at family dinners, Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter, and listen to my own family members criticize and degrade refugee's and immigrants here in Canada. I hear some of my own friends generalizing them, calling them lazy, freeloaders, drains on the economy. It makes me so mad, because they say these words while sitting a few chairs away from my grandparents, who came here to Canada, with nothing, taking low, manual labour jobs, struggling day in and day out, who were themselves targeted as dirty 'wops' or 'daigo's by established Canadians before them. My own grandparents came to Canada under the exact same circumstances. From war torn Europe after World War II, with nothing; no money, no English, no education, my grandmother couldn't even write her name. She simply signed with an 'X'. And now people who are suffering, from another region in the world, from another war, are being treated just as ignorantly, just as callously. Here are people I love and normally respect, pretending like we have some right to be here over anyone else. It makes me disgusted and frustrated and honestly, it makes me hate this idea of being a proud Canadian. People always talk about the “Canadian” identity. How it has become some hard to define idea because we are so multicultural now. I don't believe in that. Yes, we are a mix of cultures, and within that there is a lot of hatred and loathing and jealousy. Each new wave of immigrants and refugee's is targeted by those here before them. No one wants to give away their part of the pie. We are all selfish, and that's part of human nature. But we Canadian's love pretending we're different. 'We don't do that! Not in this great Country. We don't have racism or sexism!' If you want to see the real Canadian identity, you have to look at what actions we have done as a Nation, that truly defined us. That doesn't mean just the things we're proud of. I don't want to take away from them. Just a few days ago, Kenneth Taylor passed away, and I was struck by how few young Canadians know about him, about how his actions helped to cement our international identity as a country that cared about others and did the right thing. I think about my godfather, Alex J. Simmons, who lied about his age to fly in World War II as a tail gunner in a Lancaster. I can still hear him describing how it felt to feel his hands freeze as they flew over the Atlantic, how he survived being shot down into the ocean, and swam for a day before being picked up by an Allied boat. And more importantly, I remember how his voice would sink away and fall silent when he got to the people who had died next to him, about the horrors he had seen and how war wasn't all heroics and bravery. A lot of my identity as Canadian comes from people like my godfather, from my grandparents, from the celebrated elements of our countries history, and the ugly truths as well. Maybe that's why I'm soo messed up and I can't simply believe in one thing. Maybe that's why I get so incensed when I see movies like this, that show the harsh realities of people who truly love our country, and how poorly we treat them, the adversity they face, and how much ignorance and delusion everyone else lives with. I know I've gone way off track, and ranted and raved about issues maybe not even in this film. But it brought them all to the fore for me. This film really wasn't about education for me. It was about a deeper, more intricate issue, one I've struggled with for as long as I can remember. It's about life, and how unfair it is, and how some people can go about their everyday lives and never have to face that reality, while others will stare it in the eyes each and every day. And perhaps even more controversially, should everyone even have to? Should people who are safe, and well off, and living happy lives, do they need to feel guilty? Do they need to be brought down and forced to feel responsible or liable? How do we reconcile anything in a world where nothing is fair, and we don't even know if it's supposed to be? I remember, during the scene at school, where Sallieu is talking to his classmate about mental training, the other boy says something along the lines of “I don't even know if I should tell you, because this is serious stuff”. It made me so angry, for this other kid to judge Sallieu, treat him as if he was inferior, like he didn't have the mental toughness to do this ridiculous mental training, when he had been through soo much. Someone who had seen his village attacked, his own mother killed in front of his eyes, and some Canadian kid in his class is lecturing him on mental toughness? It made me want to scream. But even then, I catch myself, because I know we can't count people's suffering and experiences like points that add up. You can't assume that because someone hasn't seen as much hardship, or suffered as much, that their views or experiences aren't worthwhile. Because that's its own kind of ignorance and bias. How amazing does that make Sallieu? To not be bitter and angry about things? To move on from those experiences and be able to still listen to others, to not be jaded and feel entitled? I know I wouldn't be that strong. I know I couldn't accept the world and hold onto hope as he did. Maybe that's what I'm really angry about, maybe that's the real issue. Deep down I know I come from a “privileged” background. I haven't had to suffer like my grandparents or parents did. My life hasn't been easy, but it's nothing compared to the stories and experiences of soo many people around me. It's almost like survivors guilt, where I can't stand myself for being the exception, for being one of the lucky one's who didn't have to earn everything through blood, sweat and tears. To be honest now, at the end, I don't know what I was supposed to get out of that film. And I don't even know what I did get. I still feel angry. I still feel wrong. I want to erase all this and start again, and maybe if I did, I would write something completely different. Maybe I would try to look at something positive from this film. Both Joyce and Sallieu really are amazing people. I'm blown away with how resilient their spirits are. Seeing their suffering and struggles makes me want to be a better person. Maybe that's the take away message. That there are people in life, from any background, any situation, who are constantly striving to improve, to make a difference, to be good people. Those are the kinds of lessons you wish you could inspire, share in, develop, as a teacher. Right now, I don't feel very optimistic that I'd ever be able to do that. In fact, I feel exactly the opposite. I feel drained and helpless, depressed and lost. Where do you even start? How do you fix a system that is so complicated, so broken, so broad, that we can't even make sense of where to begin? I don't know. What's worrying me most about this whole process, about becoming a teacher, is that it's looking more and more that those questions that haunt me, aren't going to be answered, and that really, there are no answers for these problems. It's just life. And I'm not even sure I know what that means to me. Alright, I'm lost, and frustrated and just going in circles. I'm sorry if you read this, because I don't feel like I got anywhere. I just complained and whined and griped, and I feel like a brat. To be honest, I wish we had watched this film as a group, and sat down after for an hour or two, and just talked. These responses and responding are great, but its a sad excuse for real discussion and real sharing. I guess that's something I can take away from all this... Anyways, I'm done for now, thank you for listening. Hope I didn't offend anyone too much. |
Archives
October 2016
Categories |