Category: Uncategorised

Object Based Learning

I didn’t know what to expect but really enjoyed this session. I think the session further validated my belief that objects are a valuable form of knowledge and revealed new ways that they can be applied in teaching. Judy’s idea of using botanical drawings as a teaching tool is really beautiful to me. The concept that objects observed by multiple viewers could be used as a tool to teach concepts of intersectionality and positionality is the biggest takeaway from this. It offers a solution to a question I have always had about my own teaching practice which is how do we introduce concepts of social justice and be “fair” to students when we know that the ground is not fair in the first place? I’ve been pondering about “gentle” ways to make students reflect on their priviledge and complicity to violence. In a way I have felt that it is “unfair” for me to spring such a difficult subject on students who aren’t prepared to have this conversation even though I know it is necessary.

I have always felt concious of how my personal subjectivity (which I know is an underserved one) may be “forced” on students when introducing decolonial topics. I guess when objects are presented they functions as neutral parties (from a power dynamic perspective teachers and students) in the classroom. The power dynamic of the coloniser and the colonised can be unfolded by the observations themselves and students can acknowledge their positionality on their own. In a way its perhaps not just a “gentler” way to introduce a “troublesome” topic, but an inescapable way. I can’t wait to try this out honestly. I’m really looking forward to the microteaching session next week.

P.s. I’ve decided on my object, here’s a preview

I also love the proactive measures that the museum/archive people are taking towards decolonising their collections. One thing I wish I could talk more about (but I knew was not related to the topic at hand) is about teaching the practice of archiving in addition to using the archive as a teaching tool. I have witnessed, and personally experienced students expressing interest in the practice of archiving. In fact that is how my own career started- I did an achiving project in my final year of uni which I continue to this day. I think one thing that archiving/museum people need to know that the onus of the act of archiving is not fully on them. Young people are beginning their own achives as an act of decolonial resistance. The importance of archives is not just to collect subaltern objects, but also to validate the people who are attached to them. I really think that for an archive to be inclusive, they need to pay it forward to marginalised authors and archivers!

So I will continue to encourage students to use archives and construct archives as part of their practice. I definitely have a new perspective of how such a simple activity can raise many epistemic questions!

I didn’t realise how meta this would be

This is an overdue reflection on our first session as part of the PgCert! I was too excited about the thoughts swimming in my head from the insider research session that I felt compelled to write about that first!

One thing that struck me about our introductory session was how meta the process of learning about teaching would be! We introduced ourselves, had a lovely chat about our immigration histories (and immigration futures) and reflections on how covid has affected us. Then Rahul sprung the question:

“What did I just do?”

I was honestly caught off guard! I thought this was purely a session just to get to know each other and a space to speak candidly! Turned out this was a very deliberate teaching choice by Rahul called compassionate pedagogy. So now I get it, what we’re supposed to do is not only learn from the information our teachers are passing onto us, but also how they disseminated it (+ all the little interactions we have too)!

Insider Research

When posed the question “should we research our own institution?” my instinctual answer was “yes”. It seemed that this question turned out to be something more relevant to myself than I thought. I thought of Linda Tuhiwai Smith’s Decolonising Methodologies (a text that I reference far too often), which problematises research on indigenous populations conducted by colonial outsiders. Research and institutions have removed the voices of indigenous people, discrediting their research because they come from the voice of an “insider” with “clear bias”. This statement rings a bell right? Sounds like a lot of our concerns about researching our own institutions right? I support insider research as, in this case, it is part of an effort to decolonise and situated in lived experience.

So that was my initial stance at the beginning. But I became increasingly divided over time. The institution in a way contributed to the indigenous person as a voiceless subject. It is what Tuhiwai Smith is specifically positioned against. This made me think about investigations, particularly the case of Mark Duggan’s, conducted by the Independent Police Complaints Commission. The name “independent” is kind of misleading, as a lot of the investigators are ex-police. Their findings are the findings of insiders as they are looking at cases through the perspective of police. This organisation, like many others of their kind, have findings that often protect police and their practices as opposed to acting in the interest of the public or human rights (FYI police protocol hardly ever fulfill their human rights obligations). So in this case, it is fair to suspect that an “insider” will not act for public interest.

Now I am getting more confused. On one had, an insider can know more about the granularity of their community and in a way act compassionately towards them. On the other hand, an insider may be part of the problem. Insider/outsider: thats the line that institutions draw in society don’t they? They create states of exclusion and silencing like in the case of the relationship between indigenous communities and research.

I guess there’s a spectrum of insider an outsider. All my very vocal post-colonial friends know that we are begrudgedly allowed inside the institution. We are outsiders on the inside. In fact many of my friends think I’m going to be a guerrilla in the university, changing it for the better. I tell them that I don’t have the strength or energy to fight something that doesn’t want to change and that I’m there for the students. But that’s another story.

Another thing that came up during the session that I hadn’t considered is conflict that the insider researcher may encounter. This is not regarding whether conflict of interest may tamper with the “purity” of the research, but the actual interpersonal conflict that the researcher experience (for example learning of problematic incidents involving colleagues). This might put the researcher in situations that are less stressful to an outsider. The safety of the insider researcher may also be at stake depending on their findings.

I was completely divided by the end. The mention of Sara Ahmed in the references is was what helped me decide yes in the end. To me it really depends on who that researcher is! I think Tuhiwai Smith sums up the criteria well:

“In contemporary Indigenous contexts there are some major research issues which continue to be debated quite vigorously. These can be summarised best by the critical questions that communities and indigenous activists often ask, in a variety of ways: Whose research is it? Who owns it? Whose interests does it serve? Who will benefit from it? Who has designed its questions and framed its scope? Who will carry it out? Who will write it up? How will its results be disseminated?…

…These questions are simply part of a larger set of judgements on criteria that a researcher cannot prepare for, such as: Is her spirit clear? Does he have a good heart? What other baggage are they carrying? Are they useful to us? Can they fix up our generator? Can they actually do anything?”