Final Blog: Jackie Clark
This week's readings are around important issues when conducting and considering research. The first article, written by the UGA Qual faculty, is an excellent rebuttal to those who seek to apply quantitative language and frameworks to qualitative research. Since the federal government "experts" seek to judge research in such a quantitative fashion, qualitative researchers must make the case for their work and in a way that is easily understood by laypeople. We can assume, in the United States, that most people were schooled in quantitative methodology whether they knew it or not. In secondary school you learn the scientific method, and other frameworks that are mostly positivist in nature. Lack of understanding and exposure to qualitative philosophies and methods makes it difficult for "well-trained" professionals in research to accept this type of work as valid. Troubling the language used in research, the article did a good job and explaining the who, what, why, and how of qualitative research. If nothing else, it should give the reader pause to reflect on how we define validity, quality, and standards of evidence.
The second article, centered around ethics, is a good reminder of this important topic. Why do we consdier ethics in our practice? Where does ethics and morality come from? And what are the current thoughts around ethics? I liked the authors straight-forward approach to the topic, with a quick nod to the history of classic ethics, and an introduction to some new ethical approaches, like situation, feminist, and Rawlsian. I really liked the Rawlsian discussion, as I was thinking about how older conversations about ethics and morality generally come from a western viewpoint, and rarely from other cultural backgrounds. Today, we are careful to consider our epistemologies, and think about who's voices might be absent from the conversation. The Rawlsian ethical approach takes a more interconnected/non-western view that our actions impact the world and others, and we are all linked in this way. It seems more of a community approach, and possibly more relevant in today's world.
Finally, the last article discusses criteria for excellent qualitative research. I really likes the opening arguments around criteria in general, and the push against specific criteria among many qualitative researchers. I understand their arguments completely, as qualitative work is so vast and broad, but then I like her response, "because criteria, quite simply, are useful." As a new researcher myself, I appreciate the spirit of that sentiment. It is precisely because qualitative research can cover so much territory that I think attempting to provide standards and criteria are a good idea. Not as a means to constrict work, but to guide and evaluate. Her eight criteria areas are very broad, but help create a framework for consideration that I think are valuable. I don't think anyone would disagree that in the broadest sense they are all important. I will be keeping this article handy in my work, as it is very useful and practical to help guide me as a new researcher.
Wednesday, December 2, 2015
Saturday, November 14, 2015
Week 14: Subjectivities
Week 14: Subjectivities
Jackie Clark
Jackie Clark
Subjectivities
Statement
This
research project comes from a personal interest in understanding the role of
the Dean of Students at small liberal arts colleges. I aspire to be a Dean of Students in this environment, and wish to understand the role more deeply. As a graduate of a small
liberal arts college, I have a bias towards their ability to educate students
in a more holistic way. I had a very positive experience as an undergraduate;
therefore I have a positive view of this type of institution and may be
inclined to view my research with a focus on the positive outcomes uncovered.
This research will also contribute to my graduate education, as an exploratory
project leading to a dissertation.
As
a student affairs professional I also believe that the work of the Dean of
Students has value to the institution and the students. I go into this research
already certain of the importance of this position, grounded in my career
experience and research connecting the Dean of Students position to student
success. I am also highly aware of the experiences of many Deans of Students,
as I have colleagues and friends working in this role. This knowledge may bias
my reaction to the data, and my interviews with participants. Finally, my
educational experience as an undergraduate as well as my career experience is
influenced and impacted by my race and gender. As a white woman, I have had
privilege in my education, and in my career. My interactions with Deans of
Students, and other student affairs professionals have been from a viewpoint of
my gender and race (and other salient identities).
Therefore, I cannot speak to the experience of those in the role from different
identities, or know how identity impacts their work.
Tuesday, November 10, 2015
Week 13: Designing Qualitiative Studies
Week 13: Designing Qualitative Studies
Jackie Clark
Jackie Clark
|
A
Matrix for a Study of Deans of Students at Small Liberal Arts Colleges
|
|||||
|
Research Questions: What do I
need to know?
|
Why do I need to know this?
|
Sampling Decisions: Where will
I find this data?
|
Data Collection Methods: What
kind of data will answer these questions?
|
Whom do I contact for access?
|
Data Analysis
|
|
How do Deans of Students at small liberal arts colleges describe
their experience as Deans of Students?
|
Given the preponderance of small school Deans, the challenges they
face, and the lack of recent research related to the role, this study can
contribute to an understanding of this role as it is today and what support could
contribute to the persistence and satisfaction of these valuable
leaders.
|
Deans of Students at small liberal arts colleges.
Small is defined at fewer than 5,000 students.
|
Interviews
|
Direct IRB approved emails to
solicit participation from current Deans of Students on researcher identified
list.
|
Audio taping, transcription, coding, re-reading.
|
|
How do they describe challenges and supports in their current
position?
|
In addition to the above, this research will contribute to
understanding of the role in order to improve preparations programs.
|
Deans of Students at small liberal arts colleges.
|
Interviews
|
IRB approved email direct to Dean of Students list.
|
Audio taping, transcription, coding, re-reading.
|
Memo explaining matrix for a study of the role of the Dean of Students
at small liberal arts colleges.
1. Research
Questions
My research questions have evolved from
many discussions around the role of the Dean of Students. I have an interest in
the environment of the small liberal arts college, as I attended one as an
undergraduate. In addition, I would like to work as a Dean of Students on a
small campus. After looking at the literature, it was clear that the role has
evolved over time and changed significantly to respond to current pressures and
student needs. I want to explore how current Deans describe their role and
specifically the challenges and supports in the small school environment.
2. Sampling
& Rationale
After creating a list of Deans that met my
research criteria (small liberal arts institutions, title must be Dean of
Students or Dean of Students in combination with additional title), I narrowed
it by geographic proximity. I would prefer to do the interviews in person, so
the participants needed to be within driving distance of my current location.
The interview method was chosen as it best matched my need to listen to current
Deans and hear what they have to say about their role. I wanted to let the
interview unfold naturally, with a few prompts to be sure we talk about
challenges and supports. Since I am interested in their lived experience,
interviews are the best way to record their thoughts.
3. Methods
and Rationale
I will collect all of my data via 60-90
minute interviews with current Deans of Students at small liberal arts
colleges. My interview guide consists of 4-5 main questions with a few prompts
for each to be sure I get the information I need. I considered being as open
ended as possible, but since I only have time for one interview per
participant, I needed to be sure that there was useful data collected. I am
hoping to uncover themes around the different tasks involved in their work, as
well as specific challenges and supports.
Friday, October 23, 2015
Week 11: New Materialism
Week 11: New Materialism
Jackie Clark
This week's readings are dense and rich in material. Some of the concepts seem very clear to me, while others are a bit more elusive. In the Coole/Frost article about New Materialism, I follow the idea that materialism, once out of favor for discussion, is having a resurgence of interest and critique. Having read this intense piece, I find it hard to imagine how one could NOT connect materialism to philosophy and policy. In fact, my appreciation for practical application helped me understand what they were trying to say. Although sometimes burdened by complex language and thought, I thought they did a good job in discussing the many ways our material world in interwoven into all the systems that make our world work. From biological, to physical, to economic, to political, it's impossible to disconnect that material from those systems. In very real ways, with excellent examples (housing crisis), they were able to convey how the material is a part of everything, and has an inseparable impact on all discourse around the biggest issues today, like bioethics, human agency, political systems, social justice etc...I think the biggest take-away is their overall case for the interconnectedness of systems. We like to think of things like science and history, and economics as discrete subjects to study and discuss, but in the application of these things, they are all connected in significant, material ways. I am not capturing this very well, there was so much in the article to understand. But, unlike prior approaches in past weeks, new materialism has a practicality and applicability that I understand, and appreciate.
The St. Pierre piece was fascinating, and frustrating. Having discussed the positivist nature of the policies of NCLB, and the SRE in other classes, I was familiar with this disturbing lack of understanding. However, her quotations really supported the argument that the committee lacked a fundamental understanding of non-positivist work. It really makes me think about the cognitive abilities of a lot of politicians and "experts" in science, if they cannot think past positivism. For example, it's clear to most law students that "everything is grey area." Relativism is a hallmark of advanced cognitive understanding, but seems to be lacking with people who cannot see that qualitative research, cannot and should not attempt to be quantitative research. There is a place for both in uncovering and examining the world. I have a feeling that it's simply easier to pick the less elusive and less complex quantitative methodology because it can be measured. And in terms of what many people think is most important, there must be a way to measure everything! How would they test student's learning if you can't have nice clean edges, and scores. Sadly, this misses the bigger and more important point: are we teaching students to LEARN. I would argue that teaching them to think, to understand, to be critical, is way more important than scores based in positivist math/science and how many vocabulary words you know. Well, I expect I am preaching to the choir here.....I did think her quote "we've forgotten we made it up" was very funny and very honest. In the spirit of the article, it was another example of why deconstruction is necessary and how critique is important as an ongoing practice.
The Tuana article was a nice application of New Materialism connected to an event and a social reality that we are all familiar with and can understand. Her re-framing of the event around material feminism and interactionism seemed another way to explore how dichotomies do not work. Its important to understand discete concepts like social and natural, but follow by understanding that nothing operates alone. In the post tradition here, she is connecting things in complex ways, and acknowledging that understanding must flow from interconnected concepts. It seems to me that this work decenters any one agent, like human, or political policy, or natural event, and recenters them all together, without privileging one over another.
Finally, the Nordstrom article was like nothing I have ever read. In fact, in the art world, I would call it performance art. Having had little to no contact with my grandparents, but lots of interest in their lives, I was deeply moved by her work. I have also collected pictures, artifacts, and have much in common with my paternal grandmother. I have thought many of the same things as I looked at her pictures, tried to comprehend time and place and think about what she was doing/thinking at the time. I would love to work with her and make this a museum piece, with spoken word, projected images, and bring research to life in a different way.
Jackie Clark
This week's readings are dense and rich in material. Some of the concepts seem very clear to me, while others are a bit more elusive. In the Coole/Frost article about New Materialism, I follow the idea that materialism, once out of favor for discussion, is having a resurgence of interest and critique. Having read this intense piece, I find it hard to imagine how one could NOT connect materialism to philosophy and policy. In fact, my appreciation for practical application helped me understand what they were trying to say. Although sometimes burdened by complex language and thought, I thought they did a good job in discussing the many ways our material world in interwoven into all the systems that make our world work. From biological, to physical, to economic, to political, it's impossible to disconnect that material from those systems. In very real ways, with excellent examples (housing crisis), they were able to convey how the material is a part of everything, and has an inseparable impact on all discourse around the biggest issues today, like bioethics, human agency, political systems, social justice etc...I think the biggest take-away is their overall case for the interconnectedness of systems. We like to think of things like science and history, and economics as discrete subjects to study and discuss, but in the application of these things, they are all connected in significant, material ways. I am not capturing this very well, there was so much in the article to understand. But, unlike prior approaches in past weeks, new materialism has a practicality and applicability that I understand, and appreciate.
The St. Pierre piece was fascinating, and frustrating. Having discussed the positivist nature of the policies of NCLB, and the SRE in other classes, I was familiar with this disturbing lack of understanding. However, her quotations really supported the argument that the committee lacked a fundamental understanding of non-positivist work. It really makes me think about the cognitive abilities of a lot of politicians and "experts" in science, if they cannot think past positivism. For example, it's clear to most law students that "everything is grey area." Relativism is a hallmark of advanced cognitive understanding, but seems to be lacking with people who cannot see that qualitative research, cannot and should not attempt to be quantitative research. There is a place for both in uncovering and examining the world. I have a feeling that it's simply easier to pick the less elusive and less complex quantitative methodology because it can be measured. And in terms of what many people think is most important, there must be a way to measure everything! How would they test student's learning if you can't have nice clean edges, and scores. Sadly, this misses the bigger and more important point: are we teaching students to LEARN. I would argue that teaching them to think, to understand, to be critical, is way more important than scores based in positivist math/science and how many vocabulary words you know. Well, I expect I am preaching to the choir here.....I did think her quote "we've forgotten we made it up" was very funny and very honest. In the spirit of the article, it was another example of why deconstruction is necessary and how critique is important as an ongoing practice.
The Tuana article was a nice application of New Materialism connected to an event and a social reality that we are all familiar with and can understand. Her re-framing of the event around material feminism and interactionism seemed another way to explore how dichotomies do not work. Its important to understand discete concepts like social and natural, but follow by understanding that nothing operates alone. In the post tradition here, she is connecting things in complex ways, and acknowledging that understanding must flow from interconnected concepts. It seems to me that this work decenters any one agent, like human, or political policy, or natural event, and recenters them all together, without privileging one over another.
Finally, the Nordstrom article was like nothing I have ever read. In fact, in the art world, I would call it performance art. Having had little to no contact with my grandparents, but lots of interest in their lives, I was deeply moved by her work. I have also collected pictures, artifacts, and have much in common with my paternal grandmother. I have thought many of the same things as I looked at her pictures, tried to comprehend time and place and think about what she was doing/thinking at the time. I would love to work with her and make this a museum piece, with spoken word, projected images, and bring research to life in a different way.
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Week 10: Post traditions
Week 10: Post Traditions
Jackie Clark
This weeks readings were both understandable and slightly beyond my grasp. While I feel good about the basic tenants outlined in the Prassad text, I did have to keep a notepad close to create an outline of all the terminology, history, and prominent researchers.Without a background in philosophy, the finer points are like reading another language. I tried to mottle through and see if I could explain it to another person. Just trying to grasp the differences between modernity and modernism/modernist was a challenge. However, I once again relied on my art background to come at the ideas from a related direction. That did help, as many of these philosophical movements exist among the arts and literature. I also appreciated the honest approach to challenging vocabulary. As I continued through the reading, I can see how the vocabulary alone would be off-putting to those outside the field, and antagonistic to traditional theorists. I also found the discussion of postmodernism inviting whimsy and pastiche really intriguing. Again, I really see it in the art community historically, but cannot really fathom an intellectual piece full of whimsy, irony, and playfullness. I feel it might be slightly above my head at this point!!
I really liked the article about corporate tattoos, I had no idea this was even a culture. But it was a great application of postmodern work, especially how the author connected Baudillard's work into it. It was actually really clear to me how these tattoos were commodities on display in a culture that is having a crisis of identity. As representations of status, like owning a BMW, I can see how that connects in the same way. It was interesting how the participants thought of their choice as either group identity based or a co-opting of the art for a more subversive purpose. But even then, the author argues that it's it's a false act of rebellion, too close to simulacrum to be comfortable.
Post-structuralism was really challenging, and I am not sure I really understand it now. I think I understand smaller aspects, like how language is deconstructed (Derrida) and how power is connected to broader socal institutions (Foucault). But if the conversation goes too deep into the philosophic, I get lost. I think an entire class would be necessary to really grasp the magnitude of what is happening when you seek to disrupt past convention, critique language, and decenter texts.I did think the Madness and Civilization book would be so interesting, it's clear to me how the concept of madness has changed over time, and how social conventions have decided what about it is "medical." I start to think about the idea of women and hysteria, and then I see how clearly a social construction can be tied to power and control.
It got me thinking about writing about whiteness in a post context, about how it has been created and changed over time to reflect power structures.
Anyway, I have much more to learn about these concepts, they are truly interesting but hard to understand!
Jackie Clark
This weeks readings were both understandable and slightly beyond my grasp. While I feel good about the basic tenants outlined in the Prassad text, I did have to keep a notepad close to create an outline of all the terminology, history, and prominent researchers.Without a background in philosophy, the finer points are like reading another language. I tried to mottle through and see if I could explain it to another person. Just trying to grasp the differences between modernity and modernism/modernist was a challenge. However, I once again relied on my art background to come at the ideas from a related direction. That did help, as many of these philosophical movements exist among the arts and literature. I also appreciated the honest approach to challenging vocabulary. As I continued through the reading, I can see how the vocabulary alone would be off-putting to those outside the field, and antagonistic to traditional theorists. I also found the discussion of postmodernism inviting whimsy and pastiche really intriguing. Again, I really see it in the art community historically, but cannot really fathom an intellectual piece full of whimsy, irony, and playfullness. I feel it might be slightly above my head at this point!!
I really liked the article about corporate tattoos, I had no idea this was even a culture. But it was a great application of postmodern work, especially how the author connected Baudillard's work into it. It was actually really clear to me how these tattoos were commodities on display in a culture that is having a crisis of identity. As representations of status, like owning a BMW, I can see how that connects in the same way. It was interesting how the participants thought of their choice as either group identity based or a co-opting of the art for a more subversive purpose. But even then, the author argues that it's it's a false act of rebellion, too close to simulacrum to be comfortable.
Post-structuralism was really challenging, and I am not sure I really understand it now. I think I understand smaller aspects, like how language is deconstructed (Derrida) and how power is connected to broader socal institutions (Foucault). But if the conversation goes too deep into the philosophic, I get lost. I think an entire class would be necessary to really grasp the magnitude of what is happening when you seek to disrupt past convention, critique language, and decenter texts.I did think the Madness and Civilization book would be so interesting, it's clear to me how the concept of madness has changed over time, and how social conventions have decided what about it is "medical." I start to think about the idea of women and hysteria, and then I see how clearly a social construction can be tied to power and control.
It got me thinking about writing about whiteness in a post context, about how it has been created and changed over time to reflect power structures.
Anyway, I have much more to learn about these concepts, they are truly interesting but hard to understand!
Saturday, October 10, 2015
Week 9: Feminist Theory
Week 9:Feminist Theory
Jackie Clark
This week's readings were very interesting, and I connected with them in a personal way. As a feminist, who did my undergrad work from 89-93, and master's from 93-95 (with a feminism minor), I see the changes in the movement and theory from those years. As described in the reading, there are distinct schools of feminist thought, and all respond to both immediate need and experimentation. In each chronological era (like first wave, second wave, third wave) women are trying to change social structures which is a response to immediate need and create new theory. I think after hundreds, if not thousands of years of patriarchy and subordination in most cultures, it's taking decades of work to uncover and position women in a new social structure. "Unpacking" the complex relations of women to society, women to men, women to women, women to work, etc...is requiring a kind of intersectionality that has not been seen before. And with each new movement, critique, theory, or social change comes a backlash or push-back from every side. You could almost summarize it simply as "damned if you do, damned if you don't." Reading the chapters on feminist theory, separated by 25 years' time provides an interesting comparison. Much of the foundational feminist thought remains intact, with the biggest change today being a recognition of intersectional work. Although, Agger never actually uses the term, which is interesting. Agger's chapter does a good job of historicizing feminism, showing the variety of work from the past, and elucidating different viewpoints. It really captures the complexity in understanding the many sides of feminist theory.
Gill's article about feminism and advertising was helpful in showing, through something we encounter every day, how deeply feminism is a part of life. Our pop culture society thrives on advertising, a deceptive and historically misogynist part of life. Feminist researchers could reconstruct this type of study in a hundred different ways, there is so much variety in the ways women (and others) are manipulated by advertising. It's been around so long, that it holds great power in how we see the world, and shapes our culture. And since it has been controlled by male agencies for decades, it's easy to see that almost all advertising is from the viewpoint of the male or male gaze. I think this, and the economic motivation of advertising in general was missing from the discussion. Or at least acknowledged. Only since women have become consumers are companies interested in selling us products and are using deeply disturbing ways of doing so. Actually, teens have the biggest spending power these days, so it's not suprising that my 13 year old "neice" wants to wear Victoria's Secret bras and is already quite clear on the kind of image she thinks she needs as a young woman. I could go on for days about being 44, unmarried, without children, and what that has meant for my life. I have conversations weekly navigating this space in a society that still has a hard time understanding why I am OK! Or why I have to reinforce with my female friends that feminism is not an angry world (mostly) but based on the idea that women need support and belonging and how can we not do that for each other?? They are hesitant to use the word because MEN don't like it. They can't claim any power in thier gender, through a simple word, because despite the fact that they are scholars, and scientists, and mothers, and wives, and partners, and coaches...they still don't want to "get into it" with the men that give them grief.
I should stop now, I am straying from the theoretical work a bit, but I am passionate about being feminist, in ALL it's forms, and wish after more than half a century, some of these conversations were resolved.
Jackie Clark
This week's readings were very interesting, and I connected with them in a personal way. As a feminist, who did my undergrad work from 89-93, and master's from 93-95 (with a feminism minor), I see the changes in the movement and theory from those years. As described in the reading, there are distinct schools of feminist thought, and all respond to both immediate need and experimentation. In each chronological era (like first wave, second wave, third wave) women are trying to change social structures which is a response to immediate need and create new theory. I think after hundreds, if not thousands of years of patriarchy and subordination in most cultures, it's taking decades of work to uncover and position women in a new social structure. "Unpacking" the complex relations of women to society, women to men, women to women, women to work, etc...is requiring a kind of intersectionality that has not been seen before. And with each new movement, critique, theory, or social change comes a backlash or push-back from every side. You could almost summarize it simply as "damned if you do, damned if you don't." Reading the chapters on feminist theory, separated by 25 years' time provides an interesting comparison. Much of the foundational feminist thought remains intact, with the biggest change today being a recognition of intersectional work. Although, Agger never actually uses the term, which is interesting. Agger's chapter does a good job of historicizing feminism, showing the variety of work from the past, and elucidating different viewpoints. It really captures the complexity in understanding the many sides of feminist theory.
Gill's article about feminism and advertising was helpful in showing, through something we encounter every day, how deeply feminism is a part of life. Our pop culture society thrives on advertising, a deceptive and historically misogynist part of life. Feminist researchers could reconstruct this type of study in a hundred different ways, there is so much variety in the ways women (and others) are manipulated by advertising. It's been around so long, that it holds great power in how we see the world, and shapes our culture. And since it has been controlled by male agencies for decades, it's easy to see that almost all advertising is from the viewpoint of the male or male gaze. I think this, and the economic motivation of advertising in general was missing from the discussion. Or at least acknowledged. Only since women have become consumers are companies interested in selling us products and are using deeply disturbing ways of doing so. Actually, teens have the biggest spending power these days, so it's not suprising that my 13 year old "neice" wants to wear Victoria's Secret bras and is already quite clear on the kind of image she thinks she needs as a young woman. I could go on for days about being 44, unmarried, without children, and what that has meant for my life. I have conversations weekly navigating this space in a society that still has a hard time understanding why I am OK! Or why I have to reinforce with my female friends that feminism is not an angry world (mostly) but based on the idea that women need support and belonging and how can we not do that for each other?? They are hesitant to use the word because MEN don't like it. They can't claim any power in thier gender, through a simple word, because despite the fact that they are scholars, and scientists, and mothers, and wives, and partners, and coaches...they still don't want to "get into it" with the men that give them grief.
I should stop now, I am straying from the theoretical work a bit, but I am passionate about being feminist, in ALL it's forms, and wish after more than half a century, some of these conversations were resolved.
Tuesday, October 6, 2015
Week 8: Postcolonialism
Week 8: Postcolonialism
Jackie Clark
Unlike last week, I found the concepts in this week's readings much easier to understand. We discuss postcolonialism in our department quite often in the context of social justice and student services. But our readings provided a much more scholarly and historical context for this area of research and practice, and that was helpful. I especially appreciated the section discussing why the colonialism of the last 500 years is different than any that came before. I had been wondering about this since the concept of using other people and cultures for gain is an ancient practice. I had not considered the global reach, restructuring of the society for colonialized people, and what neocolonialism means today. It did not occur to me that the impact could be so deep as to destroy cultures to a point where they are forever different. The deep psychological harm caused by colonial rule was also important to consider, as Fanon described. What was described in the chapter by Prassad certainly captures any documentary or scholarly piece I have ever read, in terms of the deep destruction of communities due to colonial invasion, and the inability of these communities to restructure successfully after the colonial rulers abandon them. I really don't know much in depth about this, and that bothers me. It seems that there must be a better way to help cultures recover post-colonial, but when the damage is so deep I don't even know where you would begin. I was also really glad one of the referenced articles was about neocolonialism and museums. My past work in Art History and museum education had me thinking about this as I was reading, it's a huge issue in the museum community, and highly contested by museum professionals. There are complex considerations needed when deciding if you are going to represent art and artists through a social justice and restorative lens, or use the art to make money and increase attendance.
The Minkel piece about 6 Latino/a students was really good. It was constructed so well, and flowed smoothly for the reader. I was hooked on the content, the stories, and the lives of these students. She did a great job describing the methodology used and her reasons for using it, somehow in a language that would be accessible to many disciplines. I think this is a model article for writing in the qualitative world. The content was also really interesting, as I have not seen a critique of the terminology around microagressions before. She makes a compelling case for her additional terms, racialized aggression and contested microagressions. Working from the stories of her participants, it was clear that the current vocabulary around these race-based situations is inadequate. She follows the framework of CRT by writing about the socially constructed worlds of the students, but also recommending action and change. I followed her rationale for the cross-case analysis but was unclear about how it was also grounded theory.
Finally, the Ladson-Billings piece was also an excellent resource for understanding CRT. I had read quite a bit about the legal foundations for CRT from CLS, and it was helpful to review that history again. Coming to grips with white privilege and whiteness as property is hard, and intellectually demanding. Deconstructing the whole social framework we use in this country is hard to accept, but hard to argue. As a white person I have never had to question the systems I use every day, and have had a mostly positive relationship with them. Understanding that for others, this is not the case is really disturbing. More and more I understand why people of color don't trust agencies in this country, because they have no reason to believe that they will be given the benefit of the doubt at any time. In this case, connecting CRT to education was very clear, and easy to understand. Again, it disrupts the common belief that white majority citizen tend to have that systems are fair, and everyone has an equal chance. Looking more deeply at curriculum, instruction and pedagogy, and school funding makes it painfully clear that equality is a myth.
Jackie Clark
Unlike last week, I found the concepts in this week's readings much easier to understand. We discuss postcolonialism in our department quite often in the context of social justice and student services. But our readings provided a much more scholarly and historical context for this area of research and practice, and that was helpful. I especially appreciated the section discussing why the colonialism of the last 500 years is different than any that came before. I had been wondering about this since the concept of using other people and cultures for gain is an ancient practice. I had not considered the global reach, restructuring of the society for colonialized people, and what neocolonialism means today. It did not occur to me that the impact could be so deep as to destroy cultures to a point where they are forever different. The deep psychological harm caused by colonial rule was also important to consider, as Fanon described. What was described in the chapter by Prassad certainly captures any documentary or scholarly piece I have ever read, in terms of the deep destruction of communities due to colonial invasion, and the inability of these communities to restructure successfully after the colonial rulers abandon them. I really don't know much in depth about this, and that bothers me. It seems that there must be a better way to help cultures recover post-colonial, but when the damage is so deep I don't even know where you would begin. I was also really glad one of the referenced articles was about neocolonialism and museums. My past work in Art History and museum education had me thinking about this as I was reading, it's a huge issue in the museum community, and highly contested by museum professionals. There are complex considerations needed when deciding if you are going to represent art and artists through a social justice and restorative lens, or use the art to make money and increase attendance.
The Minkel piece about 6 Latino/a students was really good. It was constructed so well, and flowed smoothly for the reader. I was hooked on the content, the stories, and the lives of these students. She did a great job describing the methodology used and her reasons for using it, somehow in a language that would be accessible to many disciplines. I think this is a model article for writing in the qualitative world. The content was also really interesting, as I have not seen a critique of the terminology around microagressions before. She makes a compelling case for her additional terms, racialized aggression and contested microagressions. Working from the stories of her participants, it was clear that the current vocabulary around these race-based situations is inadequate. She follows the framework of CRT by writing about the socially constructed worlds of the students, but also recommending action and change. I followed her rationale for the cross-case analysis but was unclear about how it was also grounded theory.
Finally, the Ladson-Billings piece was also an excellent resource for understanding CRT. I had read quite a bit about the legal foundations for CRT from CLS, and it was helpful to review that history again. Coming to grips with white privilege and whiteness as property is hard, and intellectually demanding. Deconstructing the whole social framework we use in this country is hard to accept, but hard to argue. As a white person I have never had to question the systems I use every day, and have had a mostly positive relationship with them. Understanding that for others, this is not the case is really disturbing. More and more I understand why people of color don't trust agencies in this country, because they have no reason to believe that they will be given the benefit of the doubt at any time. In this case, connecting CRT to education was very clear, and easy to understand. Again, it disrupts the common belief that white majority citizen tend to have that systems are fair, and everyone has an equal chance. Looking more deeply at curriculum, instruction and pedagogy, and school funding makes it painfully clear that equality is a myth.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)