UNIVERSALISM VERSUS IMPERIALISM UNIVERSALISM HTTPS WWW YOUTU BE

UNIVERSALISM VERSUS IMPERIALISM

UNIVERSALISM HTTPS: //WWW. YOUTU BE. COM/WATCH? V=W GGCFTWPWUQ

• https: //www. youtube. com/watch? v=wg. Gcft. Wpw. UQ

HUMANIZING SCHOOL COMMUNITIES AND LEARNING EXPERIENCES FOR ALL STUDENTS FROM PRIMARY TO UNIVERSITY PRESENTED BY DENISE LYNCH PRINCIPAL WILLIAM F. FINKL CHICAGO PUBLIC SCHOOLS 09/22/19

3 -5 ITEMS INVOLVING THE MOST SIGNIFICANT SHIFTS WITHIN CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION (1) That implementation of all curriculum with a focus on decolonizing and antioppressive pedagogical scholarship, according to Dr. Patrick Camangian’s framework of humanization, should include the following: • All content areas should develop student capacity for the following principles of humanization:

3 -5 ITEMS INVOLVING THE MOST SIGNIFICANT SHIFTS WITHIN CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION • Knowledge (and Love) of Self— Students should be involved in examining, explaining and interpreting the world not as objects, but as subjects of their humanity • Solidarity between communities and the most marginalized — Understanding and uniting with one another based on our students’ common, and diverging, experiences, and individual and collective needs. • Self-Determination — The claiming of an intellectual identity, and active participation in the transformation of material conditions (Tintiangco. Cubales et al. 2014)…

INTERRUPTING SYSTEMIC OPPRESSION (2) Educators should analyze and interrupt systemic oppression as it impacts instruction and student experience, with the support of professional development that centers on: • Educator racial identity development • Culturally and Community Responsive pedagogy. The Equity Studies Community Task Force should collaborate to create: • a PK-12 culturally and community responsive calendars • a rubric/set of resources for school site leadership to create environments that are visibly welcoming for all students and families.

PROMOTING A VISION OF CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE EQUITABLE AND INCLUSIVE SCHOOLS (3) Develop a comprehensive Culturally Responsive Curriculum Scorecard to be used by teachers and content teams to evaluate existing curricula and propose improvement plans.

UTILIZE INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL EQUITY TEAMS AS LEARNING GROUPS OF PRACTICE AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION (SLIDE 1 OF 2) (4. a) The Equity Studies Team will map curricular integration points: • identify model units for a culturally responsive core curricular scope and sequence, and regularly calendar across the grade levels PK-12, including cultural heritage celebrations, student and family activities, student clubs, and focus months around labor history, environmental justice, race/ethnicity, gender identity, expression and sexual orientation, ability, etc.

UTILIZE INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL EQUITY TEAMS AS LEARNING GROUPS OF PRACTICE AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION (SLIDE 2 OF 2) (4. b) The Equity Studies Team will map curricular integration points. Define metrics for measuring success; • Monitor, evaluate, and assess the work of the Equity Studies Team; • Serve as a resource and thought partner in the work and make recommendations on implementation; and • The task force shall have representation from community-based organizations engaged in education and current certificated & classified staff.

MULTI-TIERED SYSTEMS OF SUPPORT AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH MANAGEMENT (5) Establish Mandatory PD for all site and central staff on: § Implicit Bias § Restorative Practices § Culturally responsive curriculum scorecards across the content areas.

ENGAGING LEARNING COMMUNITIES AND DEEPENING OPPORTUNITIES FOR REFLECTION First, how would I go about gathering additional” data, I believe that a comprehensive equity audit should be the starting point of reform. Moreover, to align with the district vision and mission, a diagnostic tool (audit) tailored to Equity and Humanization Practices is crucial to gauge the current temperature of climate and culture in all schools. The data gathered will be used to set SMART goals with specific check in points and milestones throughout SY 20/21.

ASSESSING CRITICAL IMPORTANT LEVERS OF EQUITY AND DEHUMANIZATION PRACTICES The diagnostic instrument would be used as an assessment tool to guide various • principals’ work by assessing the school on critical important levers of equitable and humanization practices. For instance, an • equity audit might include: • equity trends, i. e. , examine data across multiple levels, (students, teachers, grades, programs, school and district levels) to highlight patterns of and difference in student equity survey data; school culture and climate, community engagement and culturally responsive teachers policy analysis; a critical analysis of school policies that may disproportionately affect minoritize students; grading, SEL and MTSS systems.

ADAPTING TEACHER EVALUATION FRAMEWORK TO REFLECT EQUITY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE (SLIDE 1 OF 2) Culturally responsive curriculum, pedagogy, teacher evaluation and leadership practices, among other core equity areas which could include: • Instruction design for equitable access • Teacher Evaluation with a focus on culturally responsive leadership • Curriculum and assessment design that utilize community belief systems and students’ voice and pacing • At least 5 -school centered principles of Next Generation Assessment

ADAPTING TEACHER EVALUATION FRAMEWORK TO REFLECT EQUITY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE (SLIDE 2 OF 2) • Individual learning plans and instructional outcomes • Classroom environment designed to facilitate peer discussions in community space • Professional Responsibilities; show willingness to confront/challenge colleagues who dehumanize minoritized students.

PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITIES AT THE CORE OF HUMANIZATION PRACTICES Humanization Practices might include surveys that are designed to uncover if: • professional learning communities internally and externally share the same vision, language and space? • For example, parent as a teacher during cultural heritage days; el cinco de mayo • structures are in place for educators to corroborate with community groups? • Educators actively involved into community's base organizations • PLCs facilitation of students’ focus groups are evident and in place?

DIRECT CONSTANT DISCUSSION OF EQUITY DATA Disaggregated data can be used to: Ø frame the agendas around “achievement and discipline gaps Ø identify how resources should be structured to address the inequities Ø identify educators who need extra support in serving minoritized students Ø measure how minoritized students/families are experiencing school climate Ø try to determine whether some communities are privileged or marginalized by the school Ø monitor equity in programs/classes such as advanced placement (AP) STEM, disciplinary, ESL, special education, clubs, student government and so on.

EMPOWER CHANGE AGENTS AND STUDENT AGENCY • Through critical dialogue and discourse, diversity would first be clearly defined, while an attempt to highlight the importance of a holistic approach would be explored; i. e. , characterized by the treatment of the whole person, considering mental, social, cultural, and economic factors, rather than symptoms of failure and disillusion; discriminatory and exclusionary practices that perpetuate issues of inequity and exclusion. • Soliciting support and feedback from voluntary PLC teams would inform future equitable practices and decisions. Together, the teams would develop respective goals, assign roles and responsibilities among team members and embark on the journey of impartiality throughout all learning communities. • Teams would design comprehensive professional learning plans, progress monitoring framework and calendars aligned to the General Board Meeting and Equity Studies Community Task Force until full implementation, after which bi-annual calendars would be developed.

THIS SECTION DISCUSSES HOW SPECIAL EDUCATION AND DISCIPLINE REFERRAL TRENDS, ALONG WITH GRADING POLICIES, COULD BE BIASED AND DAMAGING TO STUDENTS • Biased grading beliefs and practices permeate educational institutions throughout the United States. Giving grades is one of many activities associated with teaching and learning. Educators often assert their power over students by using grades as a method of punishment and control. A myriad of factors such as behavior, race, culture, socio-economic status and student participation are consistently being used to determine life’s trajectory for students. “. . . interests, conflict and power…” are three key ingredients that “occupy center stage. . . in the countless interpersonal intrigues” of any organizational activity, including schools (Morgan 2007, p. 156). •

STUDENTS’ EFFICACY • Students’ efficacy are key ingredients in the recipe of success and/or failure beginning from Pre. K and consequently to adulthood. • Some teachers implicitly and explicitly determine students’ intellectual capabilities based on preconceived notions coupled with predetermined beliefs and values, especially students of a different culture. • Ranking students through assessment practices are at the core of one’s educational pedigree, thus a favorable outcome in life or not.

GRADING POLICES; TRAIN TICKETS TO LIFE’S HIGHWAY • Grading policies can be considered milestones along one’s life’s story, depending on the first indicator; grades received in early elementary. • Similar to a runaway train, once aboard, there is no way to disembark based on the involuntary purchased tickets/grades given and received. • Passengers with F tickets are destined for life’s Collision Course; lower socioeconomic status, meaningless lives, unproductivity and life at the bottom of the totem hill. • Passengers, who garnered As, Bs and Cs tickets are considered on track along life’s trajectory.

DEHUMANIZATION? WHICH STUDENTS ARE GOOD OR BAD • Grading systems once used ineffectively can create disparities between those who are viewed as “good” versus “bad” students. • Who fails and succeeds and what level of intellectual infrastructure will be contributed to society? • Who has a successful life or not? • Who falls to the bottom or climbs to the top of the barrel?

GRADES; SOCIAL STRATA • Grades have become increasingly important, they determine • • • class placement scholarships’ recipients high school and college admissions and ultimately what class structure students will be assigned along the social strata or economic status • the “haves” and the “have-nots. ” •

ACCOUNTABILITY AND CURRICULUM PLANNING • Personal preconceived notions, beliefs and expectations rather than a student’s strengths and abilities • Can students’ wealth of family traditions and rich customs be incorporated into curricula planning? • Does accountability; standardized testing, data analysis, and measurement of effective schooling, as well as, state and local mandates challenge cultural heritage alignment to state standards?

STUDENTS’ RICH HUMAN CAPITA • Are students’ academic strengths often overlooked due to behavioral challenges, completely induced by a lack of understanding the whole child? • Is there another pathway that can lead struggling students to success outside of the cookie cutter yardstick designed to decipher the smart, smarter and smartest or dumb, dumber and dumbest students according to grading scales? • What about sensitive cultural instructional designs and assessments tailored to students’ interests and preference?

STUDENTS AS MACHINES • Public education institutions have similar systems and structures that mirror the functions of business organizations. Morgan (2006) characterizes organizations as being designed to operate as electronic bureaucracies. These complex systems symbolize students as machines where instruction is the input and grades are the output, failing to see students as living beings. • Does this bureaucratic approach have the potential to routinize and mechanize almost every aspect of human life, while eroding the human spirit. ? • There are limitations to this approach it tends to disband rather than mobilize the development of human capacities. Unsatisfactory grading practices and/or policies slowly suffocate creativity, extinguish students’ motivation, while crushing their selfesteem.

TEACHER, THE AUTHORITY AND RULE OF LAW • This form of bureaucracy exercises dominion through an element of authority or rule of law. The teacher operates as the “ruler” or individual who exerts his/her power over students when determining the grade, a student deserves, most of the time, it is through the academic instead of the holistic lens. • This type of practice intimidates the psychological state of mind and can induce the self-fulfilling prophecy. If the teacher says I am a failure, then maybe I am. (Muro, Soler, Cebolla, & Cladellas, 2018) •

LABELLING THEORY • Struggling students become depressed and in most cases are • frequent flyers of disciplinary infractions, absenteeism, and ultimately drop out of high school. • If however, they do not, due to their low academic performance, failing students ultimately end up in special education classes after being vetted by a group of technocrats/ specialists called an Individual Education Team. • Another labelling theory begins, behavior disorder (BD) Attention Deficit disorder (ADHD) Slow Learning Disorder (SLD) and on. The decline begins as students ascend the education tier, their pedigree is defined and life as such envelops them and their generations to come. •

ARE GRADES AN INDICATOR OF STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT? • School systems place a high value on grades as an indicator for student achievement and predictor of academic success. Stanley and Baines (2001) asserts that “a student’s final grade does not always reflect academic performance, but a myriad of inappropriate purposes including but not limited to, attitude, participation and effort” (p. 227).

GRADING POLICIES IMPACT STUDENTS IN DIFFERENT WAYS • Grading policies impact students in different ways; children who learn and achieve high grades earn respect and dedication from their teachers, and this attention in itself is a motivating factor, which influences extra inspiration for high performing children. • On the other hand, low performing students receive insolence and discouraging cues from their teachers through body language that speak disrespect, dehumanization and embarrassment. “So Johnny you didn’t do your homework again, you belong to the low group, ” or “you can’t do that work. ”

LIGHT THE FLAME AND IGNITE THE LIGHT • These policies promote distinction, thus labelling children whose learning styles are simply different, and may ignite at varied instructional flickers at their own pace during instruction. • The question is do some teachers have the match to light the flame? Is it not our responsibility as educators to access the hidden value in our students; their capability of learning and growing with the correct amount of instructional care?

INCONSISTENT GRADING POLICES • Inconsistent grading practices can inadvertently perpetuate achievement and opportunity gaps among our students. • Equitable policies can be bias-resistant and motivational which ultimately improves learning, reduce failure rates, and create stronger teacher-student relationships, build students’ responsibility and character along with welcoming classrooms. • Scholars have argued that grading policies can help fuel achievement gaps, reinforce differences in family resources and support based on students’ race and income. The key players within the institution of learning are the administrators who should: •

ACTION ITEMS • Guide teachers, parents and students through the development of grading policies within their school buildings? • Eliminate biased grading practices by looking at the whole child? • Enforce the implementation of equitable grading practices through equity of voice among stakeholders? • Mandate that teachers MUST create a culture for learning in all classrooms beginning with the seating arrangement of students can feel confident and courageous while learning; from rows to groups.

EXAMINE GRADING POLICIES • Administrators should examine the grading practices of educators in school buildings to eliminate inequitable grading policies and develop measures that account for student mastery and social emotional growth. • Such practices might include, but not limited to; • a no zero policy, student created rubrics, • reteaching that allow students to correct mistakes, and • proficiency scales that assess knowledge and not behavior.

NON NEGOITATABLES • Are there involuntary bias trends in educators’ behavior toward students of color? • How accurate, bias-resistant, and motivational is grading among teachers? • Should school leaders form anti-bias work groups with teachers and instructional support staff to identify and cultivate culturally sensitive classrooms and utilize culturally literature while incorporating students’ voice in grading and designing rubrics? • Do trends of bias exist at the district level where policies are formed? • Should selected teams analyze the disciplinary and the special education program with a focus on identifying humanizing practices or lack thereof? • Should students’ sentiments be gauged, i. e. , how do they feel during an IEP referral process, how do parents feel? Do they concur that their child should have been referred? • Did the special education and/or intervention program help them? (if the process moved beyond the referral). • Through the eyes of equity how do we identify which of the student behaviors led to the referral? Are the behaviors rooted in culture, race, gender, immigration and/or ethnicity or perhaps religion?

HOW DO YOU THINK THE SAM TEAM CAN USE TIME TRACK AND FIRST RESPONDERS TO BEST SERVE STUDENTS?