Category: Hot Topics

Raising of critical thinkers: it is harder than it looks

This week’s readings about critical pedagogy may prompt some of you to apply those teachings in your current and future classrooms. Except that I have been trying to raise my kids to be critical thinkers and it is harder than it looks.

I always try to make time to explain to my kids every thing that I am doing, why I am doing it and what would happen if I don’t do it. I  try to give them the choice of doing something or not doing it. I  travel as much as possible with them, widening their views on existing cultures so they can question how the world works and start a dialogue. Most of all, I respect the choices they make and their individuality.

I cannot begin to articulate how challenging and tiring that way is.  My oldest (six and a half) has developed a keen sense of logic and sometimes his arguments make more sense than mine and I have to adhere to his requests. And my younger one (there and a half) is completely independent, he wants to do everything himself and sometimes wants to make decisions for us.

On days when I am not completely overwhelmed, I can appreciate that I am raising critical thinkers who will not take matters at face value but rather question and validate their choices. But, on the other hand, it takes so much work and time to keep up with them, being the guide rather than the enforcer of rules.

Needless to say, I appreciate Freire’s approach to education and rejecting the “banking system” and all it takes is a conscientious shift on our behalf from automated teaching/learning to eternal seekers and givers of knowledge.

We have different history textbooks

I was sent to the National Taiwan University in the summer of 2012 as a visiting student for six weeks. I did some cool research on micro fluids in NTU, met some nice friends and had a good time. All in all, I love Taiwan and the time there.

One thing I had wanted to do and did do with my friends there was to go to a book store and check out the history textbooks — sounds crazy and dumb? No. For those who don’t know, here is the thing: there were two Parties in China during and shortly after the Second World War: the Communist Party and Kuomintang. They cooperated with each other during WW2 but started a civil war immediately after the WW2 victory. Then Kuomintang was defeated by the Communist Party and moved to Taiwan. “Legitimacy belongs to the victor”. So in the history textbook in mainland China, the Communist Party is the major force in the war of resistance against Japan. But, I had been hearing the rumor that the history textbook in Taiwan, of which the content is determined by Kuomintang, is different from ours, and said that Kuomintang is actually the leading power to defeat Japan (which, to be honest, I believe is the truth). So, we were curious and went to a bookstore to find out — and it is true! The description tongue and the “facts” written are very different from ours.

Just one simple example in my life of how curriculum is related to power. A more generalized and extreme example can be found in 1984, George O’well’s famous novel. And that’s ONE reason why we need critical pedagogy.

Power to the students

What caught my attention most in the work of Paulo Freire is “respect for what students know”—that is, taking advantage of students’ prior knowledge to learn more than is possible when a supposedly all-knowing professor dictates. I really love this perspective, given my disillusionment with academia and the ivory tower and my pro-blue collar/trade school/indigenous knowledge mindset (Did I mention I want to teach community college? Or just be one of those food critics that gets paid to eat a bunch of food? That’s a thing, right?). Although I have not yet been responsible for teaching a semester-long course, I have led several lectures and labs. I always make an effort to access this existing student knowledge by asking questions in a conversational manner during the lecture (e.g. “Have you ever noticed that…”). Similarly, I like to know where the students are from to tie in examples of natural features near their corresponding homes (e.g. “Who here is from the Piedmont? You’ve probably seen how…”). Note: following the microaggression theme from my last blog post, I ask this of pretty much everyone because I find it interesting; most of the time I actually hope you will be from somewhere different, because the hydrology might be distinct there. I copied this technique from some of my favorite professors because it made the subject matter more approachable and familiar to the students. I always felt a sense of ownership or authority on a given topic that related to me in some way, as if I already knew more than I thought I did. This tactic can be successful in all fields, but I find it especially easy to incorporate in hydrology. Water is all around us, unless maybe you are from a desert (which I would find out by asking where you are from), so we can tap into those subconscious observations to discover that most of us probably know a good deal about hydrology.

Respect for students’ prior knowledge is also critical from a multi/interdisciplinary standpoint. For example, a hydrology or geomorphology course would be essential for a wildlife biologist studying salamanders, but I would also be curious about the hydrological processes these students observe in their line of work (perhaps salamanders congregating near zones of cooler water upwelling in the summer, and where those areas might be?). Or, I would be interested to learn more about water rights from a political science or pre-law student. However, in order to capitalize on what students know, we must first know something about the students. As I mentioned, asking where students are from is one good question, but inquiring about fields of study and extracurricular interests also provides opportunities to connect with the course content and make the material relevant to each individual.

Maybe this is understood or assumed in the work of Freire, but I would add the modification to his model of informed problem-posing rather than simply problem-posing. I am still scarred from a few discussion-based graduate seminars that I guess attempted to get at this problem-posing format. For these seminars, we would read a few peer-reviewed articles, which were always really complicated and archaic and often written by renowned researchers. The professors wanted the students to entirely take charge of the discussion and talk about what was wrong with the paper, what we would do differently, etc. These are great questions and, theoretically, a fine set-up for a graduate-level class. Small problem: despite careful reading, we often did not understand the papers well enough to have this sort of discussion (like, “I think they do something with a sediment sample at some point”). I should clarify, I do believe that being able to work through complex articles that may not be in our area of expertise is an essential skill for graduate students to develop. However, the end result that I witnessed in these purely student-led classes was random babbling and tangents, and I did not feel like I came away with any more knowledge. Incidentally, I have taken really great graduate seminars that also involved reading and discussing articles. The professors in these classes still encouraged student-based discussion but created some structure by providing necessary background on the subject or interjecting with their own questions. At least in my experience, this model was more successful. While I like the problem-posing technique that draws on pre-existing student knowledge, professors should not completely step back, but rather teach concepts and suggest tools that can help solve these problems. I think that students do not normally use their prior knowledge in the classroom because they develop tunnel vision (“I always have to use this equation to get this answer”) and do not necessarily know they are allowed to do anything else. I feel that small prompts and reminders that students should use all of their intellectual resources to tackle a problem, as opposed to just the ones presented in class, can go a long way.

And in honor of my last blog post…

From the journal of a “miserable child”

Last Fall, while I was talking to my parents on the phone, describing my experiences as a student at Virginia Tech, I asked my mother if she had ever imagined I would pursue a doctoral degree. She said (and I kid you not), “Nope, you were such a miserable child in grade school, I never would have thought you would be interested in higher education!”

She was 100 percent correct because in “grade school” I really was a “miserable child”. I was not a miserable child by nature, it just happened in grade school. While reading Pedagogy of the Oppressed where Paulo Freire describes the “banking education” model, I chuckled because it took me back to grade school. I can say I have lived through each one of those bullet points Paulo Freire stated – hence the misery. My parents were always be surprised that I got fantastic grades in any subject that had a “practical” attached to it (basically part of the course during which I had to do a hands-on application of the knowledge gained in the theory class) versus a purely theoretical subject. I absolutely loved the subjects with a practical component because they helped me apply what I had learned in class to solve the problem at hand. The curiosity of how something I read in a book would translate into a real life scenario was inspiring to me. It was the ‘active’ that I was drawn to instead of the ‘passive’ as we read about in the Pedagogy of Freedom article.

Drawing just a little more on my experience of teachers growing up, whenever I saw a grade school teacher outside the context of the classroom, they seemed so nice…they even smiled! In the classroom however, they were these magnanimous personalities that I never formed a connection with. In contrast, I have known and connected with some educators over the years (mainly during my graduate schools) who I respect and admire not just due to the fact that they facilitated my education and helped me learn, but also because they cared about my learning…not their teaching but my learning. They made me aware of things I needed to know but did not expect me to repeat verbatim what they had said. They were patient with me and that just made all the difference. These educators, as I would like to address them, helped me realize that learning was not cramming and regurgitating, learning was organic if the conditions surrounding the attempt to learn were conducive.

How can I apply this to myself when I am standing in the shoes of an educator?! I really liked the video in which Paulo Freire says “…the virtue of tolerance, it is through the exercise of tolerance that I discover the rich possibility of doing things and learning different things with different people. Being tolerant is not a question of being naïve…it does not demand from me to lose my personality.” Thus, as an educator, I would have to develop the ability of being patient, learn how to teach in a fashion that is conducive to the learning of the individuals in my class, of wanting to learn with them and for them and in the process not forgetting who I am as an educator and what I bring to the table to facilitate and create that learning environment.

 


The numbers say I am racist

How do we recognize when we are flying in autopilot?

Last week I took a version of the Implicit Association Test. The aim of the test is to look at perhaps hidden bias in our own minds by looking at the difference in ability to associate positive terms with or negative terms or positive terms with a given race or identity, in this case not my own. I did quite poorly. I’m not even really sure I want to admit this. How comfortable am I admitting this result with my friends? Is that a conversation I want to have? Would it be hurtful to do so? Or is it only my own ego I would hurt?

So in short the survey was a really a horrible experience. I am grateful for the experience, but to be blunt I found it sickening. Have you ever felt self-conscious around yourself? Have you ever found yourself wondering what you might be thinking? A little tempted to squirm out of your own consciousness, and find some meaningless distraction? Have you ever attempted to eavesdrop on the conversation in your head as though looking for gossip? This week I have found myself questioning myself. I want to know if this is true in my interactions with people. Or at least I want to find out. It’s hard to say if I really want to know.

From the experience, I think there were two kinds of factors playing in on the unconscious mind – the mind on autopilot. The first a bias against another group, and the second a bias toward myself. The first is hard for me to wrap my mind around. The second is easier. What I have never noticed before is how many of my mnemonics are based on some system of ranking, of doling out importance. When I memorize numbers I use tricks like noticing when the digits add to 10, patterns and symmetry, and – conspicuously – a competition between the “good” even numbers and the “bad” odd numbers. I’ve done this for as long as I can remember without ever consciously deciding to do so.

What’s scary is how often I use “likeness to me” as a mnemonic. I’ll use my age, my initials, my favorite color, my “favorite” number, whatever it takes as a tag. And if I am trying to remember an ordered list or associate numbers with terms, I find it easier to remember when the more “me-like” is the greater. For example, potassium is “my” element because it’s abbreviation is “K.” My initial. The concentration of potassium is high inside the cell (I get to be the “insider”), and the Na+/K+-ATPase that maintains this gradient only pumps 2 K+ in for every 3 Na+ out (because I can’t be pushed around like so much sodium…). I use all sorts of mnemonics and the crazier the better. My memory is pretty horrible. Repetition hardly helps. My spelling skills are remedial (if anyone bothered to recognize that there is such a thing). But I don’t think I am off the mark when I say my memorization skills – the conscious ability to memorize what I set out to memorize – are very good. It’s something you practice as a biology major. But I’ve never pieced this together before; good at what cost? Have I trained myself to be quickly and instinctively egocentric?

And then there is the other factor that I have to wrestle with. The idea that with these results there is inherently a bias against. That’s the way this works. What do I do with that? I really like the concept so the hidden brain introduced by Shankar Vedantam. In effect he says that one of the best ways to get back control form the autopilot in my mind is to admit that the autopilot is there. To be aware of it.  That’s what this assassination test did for me.  Kind of like when a real pilot can be tricked into believing they are flying level between two layers of clouds, when if fact the clouds are not level at all.  We need some instrumentation and hard and fast numbers to identify the false horizon.  In the interview with Shankar Vedantam they talked about the idea of which person the autopilot of personal default or the conscious pilot is the “real you.” I really think it depends of which one is flying the plane. David Foster Wallace: “Twenty years after my own graduation, I have come gradually to understand that the liberal arts cliché about teaching you how to think is actually shorthand for a much deeper, more serious idea: learning how to think really means learning how to exercise some control over how and what you think.” Whether his long bout with depression and eventual suicide gives him credibility here or the lack of it could be taken either way; I fundamentally agree with this quote. So I will take it as a good thing: not getting a poor score on the Implicit Assessment Test, but having taken it and gotten a score at all. And I hope that this exercise will build into my arsenal and allow me to help facilitate similar experiences in the classroom and continually in my own life.

Privilege Pedagogy–Awkward, Yet Necessary

This week’s topic is something that is near and dear to me, something that always get me in trouble at family dinners, something that has forced me to enter into social media rants and arguments shedding years off of my life. Diversity! And the issue implicit within that topic–privilege.

Privilege can be a difficult thing to talk about, whether it is in the company friends and family or strangers. I come from a largely homogeneous area of Appalachia. We are overwhelmingly white and Christian. There were only 10 people of color in my high school and the families of all but 3 of them owned and operated ethnic food restaurants (Because in my neighborhood, the balm of tolerance was dependent on the desire for authentic egg foo young and carnitas fajitas). My hometown and many of the surrounding communities are also overwhelmingly working-class, meaning that poverty and other socioeconomic struggles are not uncommon. How do you have a conversation with a poor white person about how the color of their skin, their very identity, provides them with unearned privileges, when all they know is living paycheck to paycheck, struggling to feed and support their families, and God forbid the car break down or someone need medical care? It’s a difficult conversation to have.

And yet, it is necessary in order for us to move forward as a society, to ensure that people of all walks of life, from every demographic be it race, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic and ability status, etc. are treated as equals. We have to recognize our privileges in order to eliminate their existence in our culture, because denying privilege, ultimately perpetuates it.

Last semester I wrote a paper regarding the potential implementation of privilege pedagogy (i.e. the inclusion of instruction about privilege) in the composition classroom. I wanted to explore the idea that privilege pedagogy can be communicated both explicitly and implicitly through composition curriculum, which I chose for a few reasons: First, at most institutions, composition is a general studies requirement, therefore all students must take and pass at least one section of it. This would mean that, if successful, it would reach as many students in the institution as possible. Second, privilege pedagogy tends to lend itself to the humanities, though it should be ubiquitous to all disciplines (considering that privilege is).  Thirdly, composition is a flexible enough discipline so as to allow such diversions with minimal distraction from the overall curriculum (focusing largely on texts and on the individual). And lastly…well quite frankly it’s the only course I’ve ever taught, so I figured it was my best and easiest entry point for me. What I found was that composition seems to be a great choice for implementing privilege pedagogy, because, in many cases, it’s already being implemented albeit implicitly, due to readings from diverse authors, from a variety of backgrounds. Students are often encouraged to talk about their own identities in writing, sometimes comparing their experiences to others’. Focusing on the individual throughout the writing process does more than improve a writer’s confidence; given the proper subject matter, it promotes empathy.

There are a couple of activities that can introduce the concept of privilege in the classroom that I’ve used to positive results. The first, called the paper toss is illustrated in the following video:


The other activity is called Privilege Bingo. You provide each student with a copy of the game board below. Whoever has the most marks (or gets a Bingo) has the most privilege and “wins.”

Check+your+privilege+bingo_1ad7ec_5275610

I’ve found that in both cases, students seem to connect with what privilege is, as well as its effect in our culture, while alleviating the awkwardness of the conversation. This is key to a successful discussion about privilege. We want to be inclusive, not only because we want students to feel as safe and comfortable as possible, but also because the way to tackling privilege is through a collective effort.

Feel free to let me know what you think int the comments below. Do you have any privilege exercises that you’d like to share?

Why conversations about diversity are necessary

Diversity is something that has been important to me for a long time. Through so many conversations with friends, my worldview has grown in so many ways and continues to grow daily. My life has been made better because of diversity.

One particular quote from Brian Arao and Kristi Clemens article “From safe spaces to brave spaces” really stuck out to me as I think about diversity.

Was it the activity that had made our students unsafe, or did this sense of danger originate somewhere else?

This sentiment really supports their idea that safe spaces are impossible when talking about diversity of any kind in academic settings or really any setting. The concepts of privilege and inequality are necessarily uncomfortable, and to discuss them and bring some sort of resolution, we will have to make ourselves uncomfortable.

This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes. It is in Dr. King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail. It is a letter written to fellow clergymen imploring them to support his movement and when I read it, I feel like it was written to me. There is one part in particular that I find incredibly convicting. Here, he calls out the “white moderate.” I’d like to share it here (emphasis mine):

First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.

This letter is incredibly relevant to the issues that remain present today. There exist in this country so many injustices that are hidden under the surface. We need to bring these issues to the surface. They will make us uncomfortable. We will likely feel bad or guilty or hopeless at times. Whether we talk about them or not, they persist.

In the engineering classes I’ve taken and those I hope to teach in the near future, most of the students are heterosexual white males, and therefore ours is the loudest opinion. That means that people of color and women already hear our opinion whether they want to or not. It is absolutely essential to the human experience to be aware of the way that others experience it. Therefore, we, as members of the majority, have to take special care to hear other worldviews.

We cannot discredit another human’s experience because it’s different than ours. When people of color are insisting that there is a race issue in this country, we cannot say that there isn’t one. When females in engineering say that the culture in the classroom is too hostile, we cannot say that they are just being too sensitive. We must learn from others. We must grow as people. That is why diversity matters.


Dear current and future creator, builder, developer, dreamer, problem solver, world changer

Before I begin, there are a few things that you should know about me. I am quiet, goofy, kind, caring, shy, outgoing, creative, and bubbly. And I am an engineer.

I have a BS in Mechanical Engineering and I am currently working on an MEng in Mechanical Engineering and a PhD in Engineering Education. I want to improve the way engineering is taught and help to change the “chilly climate” that is synonymous with engineering. Engineering is not always a welcome setting for women and minorities. But how do we change this?

I came across this TEDx talk by Debbie Sterling on inspiring the next generation of female engineers. She talks about getting girls excited about engineering and changing the narrative for young girls. And she is working to accomplish this through the creation of GoldieBlox, toys that introduce girls to engineering at a young age, to change the narrative of what girls can be and what they can do.

In Whistling Vivaldi, Claude Steele talks about giving people “information that enables a more accurate and hopeful personal narrative about their setting” (Whistling Vivaldi, p. 169). So maybe we can give young girls a narrative about engineers that is broader than “train conductor” or “antisocial nerd” (because, let’s face it, I am neither of those things and engineering is much broader than that).

And that got me thinking. Can letters by engineers to future engineers help change the stereotypical narrative of what an engineer is?

Below is my letter. What would your letter say?

Dear current and future creator, builder, developer, dreamer, problem solver, world changer:

My name is Amy and I love learning about the world around me. I love exploring and seeing new things. I love creating new things and making things better. I love hearing other people’s stories and learning about other areas and cultures and perspectives. And this is why I love engineering.

I always thought that engineering was just about math and science. I thought engineers sat alone in a dark, dingy rooms starting at computer screens. But engineers get to do really cool things. Engineers get to help find cures for cancer, help explore outer space, help people learn, help improve the way we live, and so much more! Engineers use math and science to solve problems and find creative solutions to those problems. And engineers work with people to do this. Engineers are creators, builders, developers, dreamers, problem solvers, and world changers. Just like you!

Engineering is really fun and amazing, and it is also really challenging. But that is because engineers are constantly learning about new things and trying to see problems from a new perspective. But one cool thing about people is that we are always learning and growing. We don’t stop learning when we are done with school. We all constantly learn about the world around us, and engineers get to do this every day!

So I encourage you — creators, builders, developers, dreamers, problem solvers, and world changers — consider engineering as a way to realize dreams, learn about the things around you, and change the world. We need you!

Sincerely,

Amy

On eggshells

Hello. My name is Cody, and I….

  • …am white.
  • …am a male.
  • …am married.
  • …am a father to a wonderful son.
  • …come from an extremely impoverished, agricultural community in rural Alabama.
  • …am a student loan statistic, living with unbelievable student debt.
  • …am the first generation of my family to graduate from University.
  • …am the first of my family to finish an advanced degree.
  • …am an agriculturalist, ecologist, biologist, botanist.
  • …spent three years working in the field before pursuing a PhD.
  • …am a follower of Christ.
  • …come from a broken family with continued rocky relationships.
  • …am neither Republican nor Democrat, conservative nor liberal.
  • …have worked with members from more cultures than I can count.
  • …drive a Subaru.

And so much more.

In talks concerning inclusivity and diversity, more often than not, the first two items on my list of descriptors are all that matter. According to these discussions, I am the pinnacle of society, and therefore, am not a concern of progressive thought. However, if one of the first two items in my list of descriptors could change, I would be viewed as the object of progressive thought. It is here, that I want to draw our attention to a video I related with this week:

In all our talk about how to move forward with inclusivity and diversity within the university, it feels as though we are always looking for the nouveau approach (if for no other reason than to remain relevant). Now, it is currently apropos to announce our pronoun preferences (as unique and specific as they may be), if not to further advertise more of our personal identifiers (e.g., gender). Why this is now important in the classroom is beyond me. More importantly, I feel this movement trivializes so much.

Let me ask: If, in an attempt to be inclusive, we implement pronoun announcement in class, why do we not also seek to know more of the individual? Why is it not important that I announce my life experience in poverty? Isn’t my learning framed by that experience as much as someones gender? My point is not to denigrate the gender spectrum revolution, but instead to point out how I feel our progressive steps are misguided. We are taking one step forward, and three back.

Referring to the video, searching ancient knowledge, and visiting the creased pages of history, I am reminded of how important a mere assertion was for relationships of past centuries: Are you friend, or foe? Would not our classroom benefit more from a similar model of camaraderie amongst the students? Of course our society has become one of individuality, in which the parts are greater than the sum. Here’s hoping we can again be sojourning learners and citizens, instead of each vying for our place, first identifying with a group that does not pertain to the purpose of the classroom.

In the classroom, we should first be learners. Then we can hope for common ground with everything else.

Hello. My name is Cody, and, in the classroom, I….

  • …am a learner, and a facilitator of learning.

 


The only real object of investigation…

Where do I start? Since Wednesday night I have been asking myself this question and I still do not have an answer. At least it is by no means a perfect answer or even an answer at all. At this time it is like a puzzle so I plan on describing a few pieces and hopefully it will result in something meaningful in the end. Bear with me.

When I saw that the readings for this week included Claude Steele’s work I instantly consulted my teaching notes from a year ago and found that while teaching a Social Psychology lesson I had used one of Dr. Steele’s videos as a way to introduce the topic of Bias, Stereotype, Prejudice and Discrimination for my students. You can find it on YouTube here. Much of what he talks about in this video is summarizing what we read in the chapters from his book Whistling Vivaldi. A few things that stood out to me in Dr. Steele’s work were:

  1. The explanation of what makes a social identity important “if you have to deal with things in situations because you have the identity then that identity is likely to become very important to you…” (approx. 14 minutes in his talk)
  2. How “Identity Contingencies” become central to how one functions on a daily basis.
  3. “a question that makes you aware that you’ve got an identity” (approx. 16 minutes)
  4. Contingencies that threaten us become more important… caring makes you vulnerable (approx. 35 minutes)

I will deliberate on the third point here just to provide perspective. Somewhere along the path of life we all realize that we are individuals, that we are different from other people in a particular way. This could be anything like Dr. Steele explains. It could be gender, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, metal health status or ability to name a few but a differential status that makes a person vulnerable from the get-go is what is central to how we feel about it and how we function with it day in and day out. Growing up in a majorly male chauvinistic society in India I always knew as a female child that I would not be treated equally. It was an awareness that I did not argue with till later in life. My gender being a part of my identity and having lived with it for numerous years and being discriminated against for it never really came to me as a shock. Something else however came as a shock…eventually.

One particular situation that comes to mind happened in 2005. I was in U.K. based in a small town high up north neighboring the Scotland border. It was 4am on a crisp August morning and I was waiting to catch a bus to London so as to fly back home to India for good. Eventually another individual, with a similar situation I’m sure, came up to me and started making small talk – weather, sports and what not but the question that made me realize something about myself apart from what I already knew and that I had never thought of before was “what country are you from?” and soon after that came “so you are a Hindu, right?” No harm done just as long as they were questions based on curiosity. We all get curious. Just to add a little context to that situation though this was the time when U.K was in upheaval, upset and torn by the London Tube blasts that had unfortunately taken place not even a month ago. Not sure what the next question would have been or how this situation would have ended but the bus pulled up at that very time. As I boarded the bus I realized something I had never thought of before – I walk with every single one of my identities. Some are overt and some covert but still every single day, I enter situations in which other individuals have the opportunity to form an opinion about me even when they do not know my name or what kind of person I am.

I used Bias, Stereotype, Prejudice and Discrimination together in a sentence earlier as I have always arranged them in my mind on a continuum. Bias – showing an inclination or preference for one over the other. Stereotype – a generalization about a group of people or social category, usually incorrect or presumptuous in nature. Prejudice – an unjustified attitude towards an individual, usually a result of stereotyping. Discrimination – behavior or actions towards an individual, usually negative and usually a result of prejudiced ideas or stereotypes. So it makes sense if you arrange the four concepts on a continuum, right?! Now was it bias, stereotype, prejudice or discrimination that was exercised in the aforementioned story? Can you tell? Maybe it was one or maybe it was neither. I still cannot decide but it lends perspective on the fact that identity contingencies that fire up our fight or flight response become important.

Dr. Rick Hanson in his book with Dr. Richard Mendius called Buddha’s Brain explain simply that any incident that triggers fight or flight or the limbic System or the primitive brain as it is sometimes called will result in the prefrontal cortex or our thinking brain to shut down. Therefore, no matter what we know through our prefrontal cortex, the area that is responsible for higher level thinking and reasoning, we are not thinking with that part of the brain anymore. Everything at that time and in that moment is about survival. Thus, it would make complete sense if I were threatened or felt threatened due to one or two identity contingencies that those contingencies would then be extremely important to me and any time, any single time one of those identity contingencies were threatened, they would trigger a fight or flight response in me. How simple does that sound on a cognitive prefrontal cortex level. On the level or our primitive brain however, it sounds horrifying.

If I learned anything on my journey to becoming a counselor it was to treat every individual as…wait for it…an individual. Even while considering them in various roles and different social contexts one always has to try and understand the individual. This takes time. After listening to numerous stories, and mind you real, horrifying, heart wrenching life stories, and trying understand how it feels like to be in my client’s shoes, I can say that it has been the most humbling experience of my life. One has to make a deliberate shift from forming an opinion to forming an understanding. Carl Jung in his famous work The Undiscovered Self says:

“Judged scientifically, the individual is nothing but a unit which repeats itself ad infinitum and could just as well be designated with a letter of the alphabet. For understanding, on the other hand, it is just the unique individual human being who, when stripped of all those conformities and regularities so dear to the heart of the scientist, is the supreme and only real object of investigation.” (p. 10)

Stepping into the role a teacher then we have to decide – what is the real object of our investigation? If the object of our investigation is what inspires learning in our students then we would need to know who the student is. In order to know the student then, we would need to understand their identity contingencies. If we are neglecting to understand our student’s identity contingencies we are neglecting to understand the student and therefore in turn neglecting to understand what really inspires learning in our students.

Lastly, I know I am a dreamer, but even I know that a perfect world does not exist. I know that even an ideal world is difficult to create. Just like years ago I knew that in the Indian society a female child is a liability and as I mentioned before, would never be treated equally. Is it however, too much to dream that every individual could be, should be and has the right to be treated with equity?!


1 2 3 4 … 7