(click any section below to continue reading)
In Depth
In classrooms, intentionally or not, we sometimes use students as scapegoats, to allow
us to cast off discomfort with ourselves and our practice and to avoid confronting
our own weaknesses and insecurities. In Western thought, Hegel described this as
the creation of the Other (Kain 1943), or someone who is different from us in some
fundamental, lesser, and inferior way, such as values, religion, gender, race, ethnicity,
species, or sexuality. The Other is our scapegoat, which in common psychology is the
person or people held to blame for a multitude of problems for which they are not
responsible.
I’d be doing a real injustice to children if I led you to believe that the creation
of the Other existed only in the brain. Because of bias, we’ve created institutions
that reflect and enact it on people. This kind of institutionalized othering is called
institutional bias. Even if we can’t escape it, we can certainly take responsibility
for recognizing it and our role in upholding it.
If you are asking, “What does this have to do with my work as a teacher?” here
is the simple answer: If we don’t see the institutional conditions that impede the
Other, then we can’t understand their experiences or create equitable learning
environments for them. If we don’t see the institutional conditions that impede
children, we are led into misunderstandings that we need to fix students instead of
fixing the conditions that marginalize students—and the fixing-children mind-set
and teaching-children mind-set oppose each other. As participants in educational
institutions, who bring our own biases into the classroom, we need to examine and
own our role in maintaining its racist practices.
Planning for students to become people who know they are meaningful members
of the school community, who are competent, and who are autonomous requires that we have compassion for each and every student—but especially for the student
who is most unlikeable to us. We have all met them, have all taught them, and
at times it seems like those children are demanding that we have heroic levels of
patience and persistence. We really start to lose it when we realize that patience
and persistence are not enough. We can’t tolerate it when being who we are in this
moment is not enough.
I’m suggesting that we shift our paradigm about how children can and should fit
into the structure of a classroom community. Many of us expect children to conform
to the model we envision. This often seems like expecting a square peg to fit in a
round hole. Just because many children can do it, it doesn’t mean everyone should
be expected to. Instead we should be thinking about how to make our instruction,
both social and academic, conform to student needs.