Relationship between teacher and students—the socio-cultural-ethical dimensions of teaching
Teaching something thoroughly requires understanding not only the discipinary content knowledge, but also understanding and mediating the learning of such knowledge within the context of specific teacher student relationships. In response to rapidly changing demographics in classrooms, teaching and learning must be responsive to diverse children, families and their communities. Relationships formed between teachers and students must be based in understanding of students’ lives both inside and outside of the classroom: their neighborhoods, the language spoken in their homes, attributes of their families and the cultural groups with whom they identify. The preparation of candidates needs to include helping them understanding the depth and types of relationships developed between schools and communities/homes and schools/parents and teachers/teachers and students as well as understanding the ethical constructs involved in teacher decision-making. Our framework for this involves thinking about content and method symbiotically intertwining one with the other, forming a base from which candidates learn and study first-hand the socio-cultural issues of race, class, gender and sexuality that impact the relationships formed inside and outside of classrooms.
This foundation is formed first through ongoing study, discussion and reflection by the faculty and cooperating teachers who work with the candidates. Establishing a common vision for the program creates the base to support intentionally designed intellectual and practical experiences for pre-service teachers. Without buy-in and coordination from all people and programs supporting teacher education, the best hope is a fragmented experience allowing for the little growth beyond what students already know and replication of systems and classrooms that proclaim socio-cultural understanding, but do little to change the marginalization or gaps that occur in current educational settings. We use a three-part practicing knowledge model that includes carefully designed classroom experiences, school-based components and community-based experiences that lead to the possibility of student teaching in diverse settings (Sleeter 2008). This framework for the socio-cultural dimension of teaching comes from emerging work supporting community-based learning as an important, often missing component in teacher preparation programs (Sleeter, 2008; Villegas & Lucas 2002). By involving candidates in classroom and community activities that impact student lives, candidates begin understanding the culture and lives of children and their families. This three-part construction works to integrate content and support the study of the identified dimensions of our program. Those dimensions have been filtered from our own beliefs and work of current scholars studying multicultural education and diversity issues (Banks et al., 2005; Cochran-Smith, 2005; Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005; Jordan-Irvine, 2003; Ladson-Billings, 1999, 2004; Sleeter, 2008; Villegas, 2008; Villegas & Lucas, 2002). These dimensions are:
• Candidate selection—Disposition to responsible change
• Understanding multiple perspectives—developing “socio-cultural consciousness”
• Appreciation of diversity—recognizing assets
• Developing global and community based understandings of student’s lives
We will discuss each of these ideas and their contribution to the framing of the socio-cultural dimension of teaching as well as their interface with our “practicing knowledge” model.
Dimensions of socio-cultural understanding
Candidate Selection-It’s all about attitude
Increasingly involved in program admittance is consideration of the traits that students bring with them to the teacher education program. Their willingness to work with all children regardless of race, socio-economic class, gender, and ability becomes an important benchmark of their openness to ideas that will be presented during their program at WSU. Believing that all children have the capacity and right to learn is an ever-growing signifier of their abilities to form relationships and work with children who may differ from themselves. This is an especially important trait at our predominantly white, rural and Midwestern University where students often come from homogeneous backgrounds with little experience with students other than those who are similar to themselves. We realize however, that those once homogenous communities have a changing population that is quickly becoming more heterogeneous. This diversity will form the classrooms in which our candidates teach and work. Candidates’ openness to examining continuing changes to our schools and communities will be crucial to their success as teachers.
Understanding multiple perspectives—developing “socio-cultural consciousness”
Through the program's course offerings, special events, and carefully designed field experiences leading to student teaching, the program helps develop a “socio-cultural consciousness” or an individual understanding that attitudes, behaviors and being are deeply influenced by such factors as race, ethnicity, social class, gender and sexuality. This is needed to help teachers respect all learners and their experiences to begin identifying the attributes and perspectives that all students bring with them from their family settings and backgrounds (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005; Villegas & Lucas, 2002), and to mediate learning learning through such socio-cultural awareness. In order to fully understand and gain socio-cultural consciousness pre-service teachers must look both through an individual lens at their own identities as well as understand the complex connections between schools and society.
Initially students must encounter opportunities to examine their own socio-cultural identities. While students may enter the program with a strong sense of who they are and where they come from, they must be prompted to inquire about the different experiences and beliefs that have shaped their beliefs. They do this by examining the various social and cultural groups to which they belong. Saying that they are “American” doesn’t look far or deep enough. Rather they are offered opportunities to explore the events of their personal and family histories that have impacted their worldview. Guiding this discovery are explorations of social location, gender issues, and geographical location. Through this process candidates reflect upon specified aspects of themselves and engage in conversations with others, as they begin unraveling the understandings they have grown up with and see that these are not universal experiences shared by everyone. At this point they begin discussing how culture has shaped their views and what this might mean in relation to students. As Bernstein said, “If the culture of the teacher is to become part of the consciousness of the child, then the culture of the child must first be in the consciousness of the teacher” (cited in (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005).
Once an understanding of personal socio-cultural consciousness is initiated a more complex understanding of multicultural perspectives begins as relations between schools and society are explored. Pulling apart stratified societal layers along race and class lines opens opportunities to explore questions of status and its relation to easily visible and hidden power differentials in public structures. Where one is located in this construction deeply affect one’s experience in the world. Bringing in issues of social mobility, meritocracy, and inequality invoke questions in relation to historical and institutional perspectives of education. Candidates have opportunities to consider and question the degree to which schools have offered equal opportunities for everyone, allowing individual success for their merits or talents (Bowles & Gintis, 1976). They further develop their socio-cultural consciousness by probing whether reform issues like tracking or desegregation have succeeded in changing or perpetuating institutionally biased practices. The seemingly simple relations between teachers and students are made much more complex by larger external forces (politics, policies, reforms) that have an impact on the context of practice. Gaining socio-cultural competence requires examining both formal and informal systems of schools and making difficult realizations that existing school structures, thought to represent possibilities for advancement, often reproduce the very inequalities that they claim to solve. In order to work within and advocate change candidates must understand how these structures work and be lead through the ethics of decision making for such complex problems.
Using the practicing knowledge model allows students throughout their program to wrestle with these complex questions first through guided classroom readings and discussions as they unravel their own identities and later as they tackle the even more complex questions about the role of societal and institutional structure. Opportunities to observe various school structures first hand as well as participate in understanding community components that influence school decision making (such as school board meetings, community economic base and state legislative process) all become supportive experiences in helping students begin developing their socio-cultural awareness.
Appreciation of diversity—recognizing assets
Thinking about the terms used within discussions of multicultural education offer a perspective of the progression of the field’s thinking about culturally and linguistically diverse learners (AACTE, 2002) and helps think about its position within teacher education at WSU. The terms are:
• Acculturation—process of learning about and living in another/second culture.
• Assimilation—individuals who are expected to relinquish their own cultural (and sometimes language) identity.
• Adaptation—individuals who maintain their own cultural heritage (and frequently language) as they learn another.
• One-way accommodation—when students are viewed as culturally deprived or genetically inferior to those who are successful
• Mutual accommodation—when teachers and schools recognize and build upon the resources and assets that students bring to the school.
Historically the terminology of multicultural education has moved from discussions of assimilation in the last decades to views of mutual accommodation or pluralism. Advocates of pluralism do not believe in the separation of one group from another, but rather encourage the preservation of linguistic and cultural differences through respectful interaction and communication that help one another understand differences (Villegas, 2008). As interactions are encouraged new understandings are constructed locally which can be used in forming relationships between students and teachers. This idea is further explained by Carl Grant and Aubree Potter (Grant & Potter, (in press)):
Constructive pluralism is a form of “pluralism” which pays particular attention to “minority and marginalized groups” in a society in that it seeks, acts and needs their active participation. It is “constructive” because it is created, or built, through the participation of groups with one another. It goes beyond the awareness and acceptance of diversity, contending that “diversity” is not authentic (structured) engagement among group of people, and that it is not pluralism. Constructive pluralism requires that groups strive to see each other through the perspectives of the particular group. The development of a democratic community is not about minority groups being assimilated into mainstream culture, completing adopting mainstream values and only using mainstream language….
This view moves educational discussions away from looking at deficit ways of viewing students from poverty and marginalized racial groups. Rather, the central focus shifts to the recognition of assets existing within households and communities. Physical resources such as books and newspapers, family practices, behavioral patterns, and values all become important assets when teaching children and forming dialogic relationships with families. This view requires teachers to begin moving beyond strictly knowing their students within the contexts of classrooms and encourages them to begin understanding the lived experiences of children’s lives as a way to better understand their in-school behavior and as a way to incorporate the “funds of knowledge” possessed by their families (Gonzáles, Moll, & Amanti, 2005. This approach better prepares teachers to meet children where they are at and increases their motivation to learn (Ladson-Billings, 1994)
While there are social, cultural and political differences recognized between groups in society, the responsibility of teachers is to facilitate relationships with students that provide access to ways that allow them to operate within the mainstream of society. This is an important connecting point for the other dimensions of teaching talked about in this conceptual framework and will be more thoroughly discussed in the last section. The complexity of providing instrumental knowledge and skills for students is found in teaching teachers to build from what students know, rather than thinking they must replace what students bring with them to school (Lucas, Villegas, & Freedson-Gonzalez, 2008). Finding ways to impart knowledge without privileging or devaluing personal/cultural belief systems is essential to appreciating diversity and forming relationships which encourage each child’s success.
Being able to talk openly and frequently about issues of race, class, gender and sexuality is an important part of the teacher education process as candidates learn to identify and appreciate hidden issues not always identifiable as racist or sexist ways of thinking. Racism in education is not usually openly expressed, but rather Ladson-Billings cites a definition used by Wellman that better describes the type of racism “usually experienced by students from teachers,” that is “culturally sanctioned beliefs which, regardless of the intentions involved, defend the advantages whites have because of the subordinated positions of racial minorities.” (cited in Ladson-Billings, 1999). To fully comprehend these invisible undiagnosed barriers that prevent forming relationships with students, many opportunities that allow questioning the ideas that have often stereotyped behaviors of ethnic and minority groups must exist. Ideas that are believed to be “normal” are presented so that pre-service teachers can deconstruct these notions finding a wide rather than narrow continuum of characteristics that describe and are practiced by different groups of people. This construction of “normal” makes it difficult to essentialize and attribute specific traits to any one group. Through this practice pre-service teachers begin understanding the wide variations that exist within any ethnic category and avoid the development of the “tourist approach” to multicultural education and stereotyped understandings that guide relationship formation between teachers and students (Gonzales-Mena, 2008).
One of the greatest challenges for WSU is offering experiences that offer opportunities to observe and interact first-hand with differences beyond the borders of campus and community settings. For students who have grown up in urban centers, Winona and its rural surroundings offers some decidedly different opportunities. On the other hand, for those who have come from small or rural communities the setting is familiar. The challenge is extending the experience for all students so that they begin exploring and understanding the global community which is increasingly becoming part of every community.
Developing global and community based understandings of student’s lives
Connecting with and understanding peoples who share different backgrounds has increasingly become a mantra in teacher education and increasingly encouraged through interactions outside of the classroom (Gonzáles, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 1999; Sleeter, 2008; Villegas & Lucas, 2007; Zeichner, 2003). The formation of these relationships between teachers and students cannot be left to chance or taken for granted. Teacher candidates need practice in thinking about how students’ learning experiences from their outside-the-classroom worlds connect to bits of knowledge being taught inside the classroom. Students need help in connecting the relevance of classroom knowledge to their lives and the world outside of the classroom. This requires detailed understanding of children and their families and the formation of relationships with both. Using the practicing knowledge model, careful course planning and diverse field/clinical experiences candidates are lead to greater understanding of both the complexity and method of forming respectful rapport between teachers and their students.
As candidates begin wrestling with the complexity of relationships, many of the thoughts expressed in earlier sections of this socio-cultural dimension form the framework for this process—their overall dispositional understanding of students; developing a socio-cultural consciousness, and appreciating diversity. The method becomes a carefully constructed process that is consciously nurtured throughout their program by developing ways of observing and participating in diverse cultural settings. In following the practicing knowledge model these experiences lead students to both classroom and community-based settings. Believing that students must first understand the communities from which their students come and develop an ability to read the contextual layers of a particular setting or organization, leads to knowing that forms an environment for their classroom practice. This provides a setting for candidates to begin blending historic and current literature with the human aspects of practice.
Beyond gaining the contextual understanding of practice, candidates begin to see and understand the mixture of external forces that greatly shape all efforts within schools. External forces such as policies, politics, and public opinion work shaping the larger contexts of educational practices that are often invisible to teacher candidates, but have great affect on the relationships that are formed. From the time students enter WSU they are encouraged to participate in service learning opportunities within local and global communities. These often random experiences, offer students a look at the people and structures that exist within communities. As students enter the teacher education program these community and global experiences become more purposefully focused on children’s lives as candidates work in community-based activity and tutoring programs that offer opportunities to observe children interacting with peers, families, and other adults in a variety of settings. Additionally, candidates are encouraged to travel to urban, regional and international settings that offer more concrete experiences with racial, ethnic and socio-cultural diversity than is available in southeastern Minnesota. By looking beyond comfortable borders students are encouraged to question their own understandings of race, class, gender and sexuality issues. By broadening and deepening existing understandings single ideas begin forming continuums which move beyond ideas constructed around stereotypes. As they begin understanding the fluidity with which people and ideas do and do not move within established socio-cultural norms they can begin examining how people and understandings become hybrid based on multiple influences and existing discourses. Teacher education students recognize that this continual bumping of ideas and identities construct understandings that can (mis)inform local practices and greatly influence relationships inside and outside of educational institutions.
It is believed that these community and globally based understandings travel with teachers into classrooms as they begin working with children and encourage teachers to begin opening their classroom doors to the larger world outside. It is this reciprocal connection with the world that begins preparing students for careers, citizenry, and life long learning. Culturing these complex educational dispositions is increasingly made possible by the intentionality of the relationships that are formed between teachers and students. As presented in this section, the socio-cultural dimension of teaching becomes increasingly complex as the context of our communities and world is changing and issues of social justice are identified as pivotal to our understanding of relationships between teachers and students.
Being constantly mindful of this in practice and decision-making becomes a hallmark of professionally respected teachers. This will be more thoroughly addressed in the final section of the framework. Next we will discuss pedagogical practices of teaching as they interlock with each of the previously discussed dimensions.
Teaching something thoroughly requires understanding not only the discipinary content knowledge, but also understanding and mediating the learning of such knowledge within the context of specific teacher student relationships. In response to rapidly changing demographics in classrooms, teaching and learning must be responsive to diverse children, families and their communities. Relationships formed between teachers and students must be based in understanding of students’ lives both inside and outside of the classroom: their neighborhoods, the language spoken in their homes, attributes of their families and the cultural groups with whom they identify. The preparation of candidates needs to include helping them understanding the depth and types of relationships developed between schools and communities/homes and schools/parents and teachers/teachers and students as well as understanding the ethical constructs involved in teacher decision-making. Our framework for this involves thinking about content and method symbiotically intertwining one with the other, forming a base from which candidates learn and study first-hand the socio-cultural issues of race, class, gender and sexuality that impact the relationships formed inside and outside of classrooms.
This foundation is formed first through ongoing study, discussion and reflection by the faculty and cooperating teachers who work with the candidates. Establishing a common vision for the program creates the base to support intentionally designed intellectual and practical experiences for pre-service teachers. Without buy-in and coordination from all people and programs supporting teacher education, the best hope is a fragmented experience allowing for the little growth beyond what students already know and replication of systems and classrooms that proclaim socio-cultural understanding, but do little to change the marginalization or gaps that occur in current educational settings. We use a three-part practicing knowledge model that includes carefully designed classroom experiences, school-based components and community-based experiences that lead to the possibility of student teaching in diverse settings (Sleeter 2008). This framework for the socio-cultural dimension of teaching comes from emerging work supporting community-based learning as an important, often missing component in teacher preparation programs (Sleeter, 2008; Villegas & Lucas 2002). By involving candidates in classroom and community activities that impact student lives, candidates begin understanding the culture and lives of children and their families. This three-part construction works to integrate content and support the study of the identified dimensions of our program. Those dimensions have been filtered from our own beliefs and work of current scholars studying multicultural education and diversity issues (Banks et al., 2005; Cochran-Smith, 2005; Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005; Jordan-Irvine, 2003; Ladson-Billings, 1999, 2004; Sleeter, 2008; Villegas, 2008; Villegas & Lucas, 2002). These dimensions are:
• Candidate selection—Disposition to responsible change
• Understanding multiple perspectives—developing “socio-cultural consciousness”
• Appreciation of diversity—recognizing assets
• Developing global and community based understandings of student’s lives
We will discuss each of these ideas and their contribution to the framing of the socio-cultural dimension of teaching as well as their interface with our “practicing knowledge” model.
Dimensions of socio-cultural understanding
Candidate Selection-It’s all about attitude
Increasingly involved in program admittance is consideration of the traits that students bring with them to the teacher education program. Their willingness to work with all children regardless of race, socio-economic class, gender, and ability becomes an important benchmark of their openness to ideas that will be presented during their program at WSU. Believing that all children have the capacity and right to learn is an ever-growing signifier of their abilities to form relationships and work with children who may differ from themselves. This is an especially important trait at our predominantly white, rural and Midwestern University where students often come from homogeneous backgrounds with little experience with students other than those who are similar to themselves. We realize however, that those once homogenous communities have a changing population that is quickly becoming more heterogeneous. This diversity will form the classrooms in which our candidates teach and work. Candidates’ openness to examining continuing changes to our schools and communities will be crucial to their success as teachers.
Understanding multiple perspectives—developing “socio-cultural consciousness”
Through the program's course offerings, special events, and carefully designed field experiences leading to student teaching, the program helps develop a “socio-cultural consciousness” or an individual understanding that attitudes, behaviors and being are deeply influenced by such factors as race, ethnicity, social class, gender and sexuality. This is needed to help teachers respect all learners and their experiences to begin identifying the attributes and perspectives that all students bring with them from their family settings and backgrounds (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005; Villegas & Lucas, 2002), and to mediate learning learning through such socio-cultural awareness. In order to fully understand and gain socio-cultural consciousness pre-service teachers must look both through an individual lens at their own identities as well as understand the complex connections between schools and society.
Initially students must encounter opportunities to examine their own socio-cultural identities. While students may enter the program with a strong sense of who they are and where they come from, they must be prompted to inquire about the different experiences and beliefs that have shaped their beliefs. They do this by examining the various social and cultural groups to which they belong. Saying that they are “American” doesn’t look far or deep enough. Rather they are offered opportunities to explore the events of their personal and family histories that have impacted their worldview. Guiding this discovery are explorations of social location, gender issues, and geographical location. Through this process candidates reflect upon specified aspects of themselves and engage in conversations with others, as they begin unraveling the understandings they have grown up with and see that these are not universal experiences shared by everyone. At this point they begin discussing how culture has shaped their views and what this might mean in relation to students. As Bernstein said, “If the culture of the teacher is to become part of the consciousness of the child, then the culture of the child must first be in the consciousness of the teacher” (cited in (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005).
Once an understanding of personal socio-cultural consciousness is initiated a more complex understanding of multicultural perspectives begins as relations between schools and society are explored. Pulling apart stratified societal layers along race and class lines opens opportunities to explore questions of status and its relation to easily visible and hidden power differentials in public structures. Where one is located in this construction deeply affect one’s experience in the world. Bringing in issues of social mobility, meritocracy, and inequality invoke questions in relation to historical and institutional perspectives of education. Candidates have opportunities to consider and question the degree to which schools have offered equal opportunities for everyone, allowing individual success for their merits or talents (Bowles & Gintis, 1976). They further develop their socio-cultural consciousness by probing whether reform issues like tracking or desegregation have succeeded in changing or perpetuating institutionally biased practices. The seemingly simple relations between teachers and students are made much more complex by larger external forces (politics, policies, reforms) that have an impact on the context of practice. Gaining socio-cultural competence requires examining both formal and informal systems of schools and making difficult realizations that existing school structures, thought to represent possibilities for advancement, often reproduce the very inequalities that they claim to solve. In order to work within and advocate change candidates must understand how these structures work and be lead through the ethics of decision making for such complex problems.
Using the practicing knowledge model allows students throughout their program to wrestle with these complex questions first through guided classroom readings and discussions as they unravel their own identities and later as they tackle the even more complex questions about the role of societal and institutional structure. Opportunities to observe various school structures first hand as well as participate in understanding community components that influence school decision making (such as school board meetings, community economic base and state legislative process) all become supportive experiences in helping students begin developing their socio-cultural awareness.
Appreciation of diversity—recognizing assets
Thinking about the terms used within discussions of multicultural education offer a perspective of the progression of the field’s thinking about culturally and linguistically diverse learners (AACTE, 2002) and helps think about its position within teacher education at WSU. The terms are:
• Acculturation—process of learning about and living in another/second culture.
• Assimilation—individuals who are expected to relinquish their own cultural (and sometimes language) identity.
• Adaptation—individuals who maintain their own cultural heritage (and frequently language) as they learn another.
• One-way accommodation—when students are viewed as culturally deprived or genetically inferior to those who are successful
• Mutual accommodation—when teachers and schools recognize and build upon the resources and assets that students bring to the school.
Historically the terminology of multicultural education has moved from discussions of assimilation in the last decades to views of mutual accommodation or pluralism. Advocates of pluralism do not believe in the separation of one group from another, but rather encourage the preservation of linguistic and cultural differences through respectful interaction and communication that help one another understand differences (Villegas, 2008). As interactions are encouraged new understandings are constructed locally which can be used in forming relationships between students and teachers. This idea is further explained by Carl Grant and Aubree Potter (Grant & Potter, (in press)):
Constructive pluralism is a form of “pluralism” which pays particular attention to “minority and marginalized groups” in a society in that it seeks, acts and needs their active participation. It is “constructive” because it is created, or built, through the participation of groups with one another. It goes beyond the awareness and acceptance of diversity, contending that “diversity” is not authentic (structured) engagement among group of people, and that it is not pluralism. Constructive pluralism requires that groups strive to see each other through the perspectives of the particular group. The development of a democratic community is not about minority groups being assimilated into mainstream culture, completing adopting mainstream values and only using mainstream language….
This view moves educational discussions away from looking at deficit ways of viewing students from poverty and marginalized racial groups. Rather, the central focus shifts to the recognition of assets existing within households and communities. Physical resources such as books and newspapers, family practices, behavioral patterns, and values all become important assets when teaching children and forming dialogic relationships with families. This view requires teachers to begin moving beyond strictly knowing their students within the contexts of classrooms and encourages them to begin understanding the lived experiences of children’s lives as a way to better understand their in-school behavior and as a way to incorporate the “funds of knowledge” possessed by their families (Gonzáles, Moll, & Amanti, 2005. This approach better prepares teachers to meet children where they are at and increases their motivation to learn (Ladson-Billings, 1994)
While there are social, cultural and political differences recognized between groups in society, the responsibility of teachers is to facilitate relationships with students that provide access to ways that allow them to operate within the mainstream of society. This is an important connecting point for the other dimensions of teaching talked about in this conceptual framework and will be more thoroughly discussed in the last section. The complexity of providing instrumental knowledge and skills for students is found in teaching teachers to build from what students know, rather than thinking they must replace what students bring with them to school (Lucas, Villegas, & Freedson-Gonzalez, 2008). Finding ways to impart knowledge without privileging or devaluing personal/cultural belief systems is essential to appreciating diversity and forming relationships which encourage each child’s success.
Being able to talk openly and frequently about issues of race, class, gender and sexuality is an important part of the teacher education process as candidates learn to identify and appreciate hidden issues not always identifiable as racist or sexist ways of thinking. Racism in education is not usually openly expressed, but rather Ladson-Billings cites a definition used by Wellman that better describes the type of racism “usually experienced by students from teachers,” that is “culturally sanctioned beliefs which, regardless of the intentions involved, defend the advantages whites have because of the subordinated positions of racial minorities.” (cited in Ladson-Billings, 1999). To fully comprehend these invisible undiagnosed barriers that prevent forming relationships with students, many opportunities that allow questioning the ideas that have often stereotyped behaviors of ethnic and minority groups must exist. Ideas that are believed to be “normal” are presented so that pre-service teachers can deconstruct these notions finding a wide rather than narrow continuum of characteristics that describe and are practiced by different groups of people. This construction of “normal” makes it difficult to essentialize and attribute specific traits to any one group. Through this practice pre-service teachers begin understanding the wide variations that exist within any ethnic category and avoid the development of the “tourist approach” to multicultural education and stereotyped understandings that guide relationship formation between teachers and students (Gonzales-Mena, 2008).
One of the greatest challenges for WSU is offering experiences that offer opportunities to observe and interact first-hand with differences beyond the borders of campus and community settings. For students who have grown up in urban centers, Winona and its rural surroundings offers some decidedly different opportunities. On the other hand, for those who have come from small or rural communities the setting is familiar. The challenge is extending the experience for all students so that they begin exploring and understanding the global community which is increasingly becoming part of every community.
Developing global and community based understandings of student’s lives
Connecting with and understanding peoples who share different backgrounds has increasingly become a mantra in teacher education and increasingly encouraged through interactions outside of the classroom (Gonzáles, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 1999; Sleeter, 2008; Villegas & Lucas, 2007; Zeichner, 2003). The formation of these relationships between teachers and students cannot be left to chance or taken for granted. Teacher candidates need practice in thinking about how students’ learning experiences from their outside-the-classroom worlds connect to bits of knowledge being taught inside the classroom. Students need help in connecting the relevance of classroom knowledge to their lives and the world outside of the classroom. This requires detailed understanding of children and their families and the formation of relationships with both. Using the practicing knowledge model, careful course planning and diverse field/clinical experiences candidates are lead to greater understanding of both the complexity and method of forming respectful rapport between teachers and their students.
As candidates begin wrestling with the complexity of relationships, many of the thoughts expressed in earlier sections of this socio-cultural dimension form the framework for this process—their overall dispositional understanding of students; developing a socio-cultural consciousness, and appreciating diversity. The method becomes a carefully constructed process that is consciously nurtured throughout their program by developing ways of observing and participating in diverse cultural settings. In following the practicing knowledge model these experiences lead students to both classroom and community-based settings. Believing that students must first understand the communities from which their students come and develop an ability to read the contextual layers of a particular setting or organization, leads to knowing that forms an environment for their classroom practice. This provides a setting for candidates to begin blending historic and current literature with the human aspects of practice.
Beyond gaining the contextual understanding of practice, candidates begin to see and understand the mixture of external forces that greatly shape all efforts within schools. External forces such as policies, politics, and public opinion work shaping the larger contexts of educational practices that are often invisible to teacher candidates, but have great affect on the relationships that are formed. From the time students enter WSU they are encouraged to participate in service learning opportunities within local and global communities. These often random experiences, offer students a look at the people and structures that exist within communities. As students enter the teacher education program these community and global experiences become more purposefully focused on children’s lives as candidates work in community-based activity and tutoring programs that offer opportunities to observe children interacting with peers, families, and other adults in a variety of settings. Additionally, candidates are encouraged to travel to urban, regional and international settings that offer more concrete experiences with racial, ethnic and socio-cultural diversity than is available in southeastern Minnesota. By looking beyond comfortable borders students are encouraged to question their own understandings of race, class, gender and sexuality issues. By broadening and deepening existing understandings single ideas begin forming continuums which move beyond ideas constructed around stereotypes. As they begin understanding the fluidity with which people and ideas do and do not move within established socio-cultural norms they can begin examining how people and understandings become hybrid based on multiple influences and existing discourses. Teacher education students recognize that this continual bumping of ideas and identities construct understandings that can (mis)inform local practices and greatly influence relationships inside and outside of educational institutions.
It is believed that these community and globally based understandings travel with teachers into classrooms as they begin working with children and encourage teachers to begin opening their classroom doors to the larger world outside. It is this reciprocal connection with the world that begins preparing students for careers, citizenry, and life long learning. Culturing these complex educational dispositions is increasingly made possible by the intentionality of the relationships that are formed between teachers and students. As presented in this section, the socio-cultural dimension of teaching becomes increasingly complex as the context of our communities and world is changing and issues of social justice are identified as pivotal to our understanding of relationships between teachers and students.
Being constantly mindful of this in practice and decision-making becomes a hallmark of professionally respected teachers. This will be more thoroughly addressed in the final section of the framework. Next we will discuss pedagogical practices of teaching as they interlock with each of the previously discussed dimensions.