Paper Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Lands/Waters-Based Pedagogies in Ethnic Studies Teacher Education

Sat, April 13, 11:25am to 12:55pm, Pennsylvania Convention Center, Floor: Level 100, Room 107A

Abstract

Objective
Launched in the spring of 2020, our co-design collaborative, Teaching and Learning in Tovaangar, brought together faculty, graduate students, and Tongva and other local Indigenous educators to create a learning community that develops lands/waters-based approaches in teacher preparation (Bang et al., 2014; Simpson, 2014; Styres, 2011; Tuck et al., 2014).


The result was a collaborative syllabus for both the Social and the Psychological Foundations of Education courses. This study captures our understanding of how faculty can leverage courses to support pre-service teachers in the development of pedagogical practices grounded in lands/waters-based pedagogies within a K-12 Ethnic Studies pathway.


Theoretical Framework
Participatory design research and co-design, sister methodologies, ask “how can” and “how do” questions to advance new forms of relations and practices that support change making (Bang & Vossoughi, 2016; Ishimaru et al. 2018). Drawing on these methodological approaches (theory + methods) we engaged in iterative phases of solidarity-driven design over a three-year period. During this time, we continually reflected on our own histories with Ethnic Studies and lands/waters-based pedagogies, discussed readings to support our continued thinking on lands/waters-based education (e.g., Kimmerer, 2013; Sepulveda, 2018), and engaged in critical conversations about the ethics of teaching/learning in the homelands of Tongva peoples.


Throughout this process we returned to three questions: 1) What does it mean to be engaging in teacher preparation in the traditional territories of Tongva peoples? (2) How can we redesign social and psychological foundations of education courses to center lands/waters-based approaches to teaching and learning? (3) How does starting from lands and waters shift our own learning and practice as TEP faculty?


Methods
For this study, we holistically mixed our methods of research and the pedagogical practices we enacted. For example, we intentionally video-recorded our co-design meetings. Drawing on our initial analysis of meeting transcripts we identified important shifts in our thinking and practice. We also engaged in conversation following class meetings, reflecting upon our pedagogical practices as instructors.


Results
We found that redesigning social and psychological foundations courses in ways that center lands/waters-based based pedagogies revealed tensions and affordances in the design of teacher education. Additionally, listening to our students as they engaged with the course helped us to understand our collective work and to see openings for yet to be realized possibilities.

For example, one of the many tensions we faced became how to hold space for difficult discussions among pre-service teachers of color. These discussions included understanding Indigenous erasure in some discussions around anti-Blackness (Quizar, 2019; Sturm, 2019), understanding relationships with settler identities (Pulido, 2018), and addressing the trauma resulting from severed relationships with lands and waters (Larsen & Jonson, 2012).


Significance/Implications
Our analyses highlight how structures within the program and organization of the courses constrained the enactment of lands/waters-based pedagogies. They also reveal pedagogical opportunities for deepening understandings of lands/waters-based approaches. We suggest the kinds of systematic changes that can be made to support collectively reimagining relationships with lands and waters and K-12 Ethnic Studies.

Authors