- Información
- Chat IA
Adultismo - xxxxx
Introducción A La Investigación
Universidad de Chile
Comentarios
Vista previa del texto
doi/10.1177/
Urban Education 1 – © The Author(s) 2020 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub/journals-permissions DOI: 10/ journals.sagepub/home/uex
Article
Challenging Adultism:
Centering Youth as
Educational Decision
Makers
Melanie Bertrand 1 , Maneka Deanna Brooks 2 ,
and Ashley D. Domínguez 1
Abstract Research indicates that youth, especially those facing injustice, such as youth of Color in urban settings, are essential participants in educational decision- making. However, due to adultism and intersecting forms of oppression, their inclusion is not the norm. Grounded in the concept of adultism and the tradition of storytelling, we address the following question: How can educational researchers and practitioners challenge the adultism that constrains youth’s participation in school- and district-level educational decision-making? We share stories about our experiences in urban schools, considering adultism at the interactional, institutional, and curricular levels. Our implications center on using critical reflexivity to challenge adultism.
Keywords youth voice, adultism, youth of Color
Scholarship has shown that garnering youth’s perspectives on educational policies and practices is necessary if the goal is the improvement of youth’s experiences and outcomes in education (Irizarry & Welton, 2014; Quijada
1 Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA 2 Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA
Corresponding Author: Melanie Bertrand, Arizona State University, P. Box 37100, Mail Code 3151, Phoenix, AZ 85069-7100, USA. Email: melanie@asu
959135 research-article 2020 UEXXXX10/0042085920959135Urban Education Bertrand et al.
2 Urban Education 00(0)
Cerecer et al., 2013). Some of this research further contends that especially the youth negatively affected by structural inequities, such as youth of Color in urban settings, are those whose inclusion in school- or district-level policy decisions is essential to disrupting structural oppression as related to white supremacy, systemic racism, classism, anti-LGBTQ practices, language and religious exclusion, anti-immigrant practices, ableism, and more (see Fine, 2008; Owens & Jones, 2004; Quijada Cerecer et al., 2013). This scholarship suggests that a commitment from the field of education—including research- ers and practitioners—to make space for youth involvement in decision-mak- ing in urban schools and districts would act as a lever to advance equity. Although youth constantly make decisions about education, they are often excluded from participation in educational decision-making, defined as authentic engagement in making decisions that impact school and district policies and practices. In this piece, we focus on opportunities for sanctioned engagement in such decision-making, as opposed to youth activism, for example. Though school- and district-sponsored student voice initiatives have been on the rise, as seen in a growing number of student advisory coun- cils (Conner et al., 2016), authentic opportunities for youth input have been elusive, especially in urban schools serving students of Color. Oftentimes, schools or districts tout youth voice, but tokenize students and/or elevate the voices of white students over those of students of Color (Conner et al., 2016; Mattheis et al., 2018). Likewise, though educational research addresses a mind-boggling array of topics, much of it fails to directly consider the views of youth or expand possibilities for youth participation in school and district decision-making. The reason for this lack of wide-spread, authentic youth participation in educational decision-making may be adultism (Bell, 2010; Conner et al., 2016)—the ideology that adults are superior to youth—as connected to inter- secting forms of oppression, such as systemic racism. This article applies the concept of adultism to explore possibilities for youth involvement in educa- tional decision-making, specifically within urban and urbanizing schools. Drawing upon Milner IV and Lomotey (2014), we view urban educational settings as complex sites of intersecting identities that are shaped by overlap- ping inequities—including adultism—within metropolitan contexts. We chose to focus on youth in urban and urbanizing settings because, as Gadsden and Dixon-Román (2017) note, the descriptor of urban has frequently been rele- gated to discussions of deficits of youth, families, and communities. Our work challenges this trend. We seek to speak to the educational researchers and practitioners 1 whose work may not focus on youth decision-making, but who nonetheless seek to enhance school- and district-level youth influence, espe- cially that of youth of Color in urban settings and others who face injustice.
4 Urban Education 00(0)
marginalized groups themselves (Love, 2004; Milner IV, 2012). This focus on the individual overlooks the structural and systemic inequalities that are inherent to education systems, for example, racist course placement policies, teacher bias, and inequitable school funding (Carter & Welner, 2013). At the same time exists another story about differences in academic outcomes that centers around opportunity, which highlights the inequitable systems that provide African American students with lesser opportunity. This story is one about the opportunity gaps (Milner IV, 2012) and educational debts (Ladson- Billings, 2006) that explicitly name the structural inequalities that remain unseen in the dignity-breaking stories that predominate in discussions of achievement gaps. In this way, the latter types of stories seek to empower rather than denigrate. Storytelling is fundamental to the work of critical race theorists broadly, and their work in education in particular. Specifically, counterstorytelling is used to develop empowering and humanizing stories. Critical race theorists or those using critical race methodologies use counterstories to challenge dominant narratives that are perceived as unbiased yet seek to perpetuate tales of deficiency of marginalized groups (Baszile, 2008; Khalifa & Briscoe, 2015; Love, 2004). As Delgado and Stefancic (2017) write, “Powerfully writ- ten stories and narratives may begin a process of correction in our system of beliefs and categories by calling attention to neglected evidence and remind- ing readers of our common humanity” (p. 51). In addition to this process of correction, counterstorytelling can be used to generate new knowledge and understandings about the world (Jang, 2017; Johnson et al., 2017; Rodela & Fernández, 2019). Notably, critical race theorists or those informed by critical race theories are not the only ones who rely on storytelling as a part of their methodology. Stories are positioned as fundamental to research that draws upon a variety of theoretical perspectives (Behar, 1996; Lac & Fine, 2018; McClain, 2010). As Maracle (1994) notes, stories are even present within traditions of research that view themselves as being story-free. Yet we choose to highlight counter- storytelling within the critical race theory tradition because it illustrates the theoretical and practical significance of stories. Moreover, the use of counter- storytelling within critical race theory has served to amplify a practice that has existed as a part of the broader cultural traditions of many marginalized groups (Grey & Williams-Farrier, 2017; Love, 2004). In this paper, we are not using counterstory as a methodology, but do call upon the work of researchers who have used counterstories and other forms of storytelling while writing about what it means to engage in research and prac- tice that centers the decision-making of youth (Coles, 2020; Kinloch et al., 2020). In sharing our research stories, it is important to note that we are not
Bertrand et al. 5
aiming for a type of transcendence that Pillow (2003) critiques in her discus- sion of the various uses of reflexivity. We do not believe that by demonstrating multifaceted representation of the research process, recognizing problematic power relationships, and applying sufficient rigor in writing that researchers can move beyond the inequity and other tensions that exist within research. Instead, we respond to Bang and Vossoughi’s (2016) call for “critical reflexivity,” which entails re-envisioning of action based on new understand- ings (p. 181). Specifically, this form of reflexivity involves paying attention to “how we see, and how we move differently based on new forms of percep- tion.. .” (p. 181). With this in mind, we engage in critical and reflexive story- telling as an approach to arrive at new perceptions of adultism in our own research and practice, and push ourselves toward new modes of action. By doing so publicly in this article, we aim to spark reflection in the education field at large. Our story selection, which was the result of a series of conversa- tions beginning at a conference in 2019, reflects our decision to interrogate adultism at a variety of levels: in interactions, institutions, and the curriculum. Two of the stories are drawn from experiences conducting qualitative research in school sites, and one is based on experiences in practice. In some ways, sharing our stories runs counter to our goal of intervening in adultism, in that we are highlighting the narratives of adults, while only conjecturing about how youth may have experienced this adultism. Despite this limitation, our stories can provide a launching pad for practitioners and researchers to engage in critical reflexivity about adultism as related to their own experiences.
Adultism
Adultism is an ideology, associated with a set of beliefs and attitudes, that places adults above children (Bell, 2010; Bettencourt, 2018; Conner et al., 2016; DeJong & Love, 2015). As DeJong and Love (2015) explain in relation to youth oppression, which is synonymous to adultism, “The ideology of adult supremacy is comprised of a set of beliefs, attitudes, policies, and prac- tices that construct adults as developed, mature, intelligent, and experienced, based solely on their age and ensures that adults control the resources and make the decisions in society” (p. 490). Adultism, which can be internalized by both adults and youth (Bell, 2010; Conner et al., 2016), entails a belief that “adults are.. .entitled to act upon young people without their agreement” (Bell, 2010, p. 115). This ideology aligns with theories of development. For instance, Piaget, a highly influential developmental theorist, argued that chil- dren follow a path from a pre-logical, inferior form of thinking, maturing toward the rational thinking of adults (Jenks, 2005). As Love and Phillips (2007) summarize:
Bertrand et al. 7
as related to a specific type of decision-making—educational decision- making—defined as authentic engagement in making decisions that impact school and district policies and practices. Specifically, we focus on sanc- tioned forms of such decision-making in which youth and adults are collabo- rating on envisioning policies and practices to advance equity. Though the term educational decision-making has not been operational- ized in the literature, our definition is informed by research that focuses on youth voice, youth activism, and/or YPAR, which argues that youth perspec- tives are important in educational decisions about policies and practices. Overall, this literature highlights the influence or potential influence of youth, especially youth of Color with or without intersecting minoritized identities, in urban school and district governance (Cammarota, 2011; Irizarry & Welton, 2014; Pazey & Dematthews, 2019; Quijada Cerecer et al., 2013). For instance, the introduction to an edited volume on student voice argues that “students have valuable contributions to make to educational reform because of their unique vantage point within schools” and, moreover, have a right to participate (Conner et al., 2015, p. 4). This is a common stance in youth voice literature, as shown in a literature review by González et al. (2017) and other literature (see Salisbury et al., 2019). In addition, our definition is influenced by Hart’s (1992) Ladder of Participation, a typology of forms of youth par- ticipation with adults, in which the top rung entails youth initiating shared decision-making with adults. However, following Tuck and Yang (2014), we contextualize our definition with the understanding that youth may not always desire to be involved in such decision-making, and refusing to partici- pate constitutes an agentive decision. 3 Refuting the ideology of adultism, the literature indicates that the influ- ence of youth of Color or other youth facing injustice is especially valuable because these individuals are uniquely situated to assess unjust systems and generate solutions (Rodríguez & Brown, 2009). As Fine (2008) argues, “... those who have been most systematically excluded, oppressed, or denied carry specifically revealing wisdom about the history, structure, conse- quences, and the fracture points in unjust social arrangements” (p. 215). However, we also note scholarship that warns against romanticizing youth viewpoints, illustrating that youth may reproduce problematic discourses (Clay, 2018). Nonetheless, studies have shown that the inclusion of youth of Color in educational decision-making in urban schools can improve school- change efforts (Irizarry & Welton, 2014; Kirshner, 2015). Likewise, scholar- ship on YPAR illustrates the value of youth influence. YPAR entails youth working in collaboration with adults to research social justice issues of their choosing and take action to transform unjust systems (Brion-Meisels & Alter, 2018; Cammarota, 2011; Cammarota & Fine, 2008; Lac, 2019; Rodríguez &
8 Urban Education 00(0)
Brown, 2009). YPAR scholarship has documented the ways that youth of Color have weighed in on a range of issues in urban schools, including ineq- uitable access to educational resources (Mirra et al., 2015), the racist enforce- ment of dress codes (Welton et al., 2016), and discrimination based on race and sexuality (Owens & Jones, 2004). And, finally, scholarship and also media reports about youth organizing and activism have shown the influence and tenacity of youth of Color fighting for social justice (Ginwright, 2010; Moya, 2017). For instance, many of the recent Black Lives Matter protests that were led by Black youth and other youth of Color called for educational justice, resulting in some concrete policy changes, such as a $25 million divestment from school policing in Los Angeles (Rosenfeld, 2020). Adultism, however, is an obstacle within the context of youth decision- making initiatives or research, much of which has focused on urban settings. Adultism is inherent in institutions, which position educators or researchers above youth, which can result in hierarchical interactions. For instance, research- ers Winn and Winn (2016) had expected youth to jump into leadership roles at the outset of YPAR projects; however, a shift from adult to youth leadership took time as trust grew and individuals became comfortable with their roles. Likewise, Brion-Meisels and Alter (2018), one a university researcher and the other a school counselor, encountered tensions in working with high school youth in the context of a school-based YPAR program. They discussed “rela- tional pulls” as the youth centralized their relationships with each other (e., joking, sharing frustrations), which competed for time spent on collective work. Moreover, adults may tokenize youth or disregard their suggestions, as was the case in a youth advisory council in an urban area (Conner et al., 2016). Also, adultism’s intersection with systemic racism adds exponentially to these barri- ers. Those youth who are granted formal opportunities for voice may be dispro- portionately white (Mattheis et al., 2018). Also, youth activists receive differing responses depending on race. For instance, Black Lives Matter youth activists have received much less positive attention from the media and lawmakers than the (whiter) Parkland, Florida, youth protesters (Glanton, 2018). Thus, in that urbanity is associated with students of Color, intersecting obstacles to youth influence in educational decision-making are compounded in urban areas. Overall, research illustrates the potential of educational researchers and practitioners challenging adultism and other forms of oppression that con- strain the educational decision-making of youth of Color with or without intersecting minoritized identities. In the following sections we consider adultism as we share our stories to shed light on how researchers and practi- tioners can promote a new vision of educational decision-making in urban schools and districts. Each story is told by one of the three authors, in first person. The first story focuses on the level of youth-adult interactions, the
10 Urban Education 00(0)
my whiteness, adult status, and institutional position. For example, there were times when I, like other adult facilitators, successfully followed the youth’s lead (Bertrand et al., 2017). However, I also made missteps, reverting to adultism and adult authority as I constrained differences of opinion among the youth. Specifically, during group discussions, I sometimes supported and bol- stered some of the ideas the youth proposed but nixed others. One example of this was captured in a recording when four students and I were talking in a mixture of Spanish and English about what research topic to pursue for the school year, building upon a previous conversation in which the students had often mentioned racism in society. During the conversation, when students were brainstorming possible topics related to racism, a student named Teresa 4 said, “Also have racism in your family.” I responded, “Racism in your family,” and another student followed with, “Yeah, that is what hap- pens a lot. Racismo en las familias. [Racism in the families.] 5 ” From there, students offered more ideas, and one student, Citlali, lobbied for our research topic to be self-esteem related to race. I asked if that was the topic the group wanted, and Citlali said that was the topic she wanted the most. At this point, Teresa again tried to bring the focus back to racism in the family, as shown in this excerpt featuring three students and me.
Teresa: Racismo de familia. [Racism of family.] Melanie: You also, you know what? I think, yo creo que son, que hay una relación. [I think they are, there is a relationship.] Cesar: Podemos combinarlos. [We can combine them.] Melanie: Entre esos, no? Tal vez puede ser. [Between those, right? Maybe that could be.] Citlali: Si, porque hay veces que la familia, cuando te hace racismo, te sientes bajo de autoestima. [Yes, because sometimes that the family, when they are racist to you, you feel low in self-esteem.] Teresa: Si, es cierto. [Yes, it’s true.]
Unfortunately, both in this exchange and the earlier one, I didn’t ask Teresa what she meant by racism in the family. Perhaps she was referring to color- ism in her family. Or it is possible that she was referring to families inculcat- ing racist beliefs about others. Instead of asking her to elaborate, I pointed out that the topic of racism in the family is similar to the topic of self-esteem related to racism. Cesar then suggested that we combine the two topics, and I responded in a noncommittal way. I recall preferring the topic of self-esteem related to racism because then it could potentially be linked to a lack of access to ethnic studies or culturally sustaining curriculum (Paris & Alim, 2014). In other words, it would be a topic that had concrete implications for the schools,
Bertrand et al. 11
thus aligning with one of the aims of my research. And I remember not want- ing to focus on racism in the family because it might not have generated recommendations for school change. (However, in hindsight, I now see that this would have had implications for the school.) So, after a tangent in which we talked about other topics, I brought the focus back to the research topic, with the following:
Melanie: So, nuestra pregunta es bajo de autoestima y racismo. OK, necesitamos decidir, elegir, estamos presentando sobre autoestima de racismo o en racismo, aquí en la escuela o en la comunidad o en los dos? [So our question is low self-esteem and racism. OK, we need to decide, to choose, are we presenting on self-esteem of racism or in rac- ism, here in the school or in the community, or in both?]
As is clear by this comment, I did not mention racism in the family or the idea of combining the two topics. Instead, I stated that the topic would be self- esteem and racism, thereby supporting Citlali’s idea while stifling Teresa and Cesar’s influence in the YPAR space. I did not encounter any protests to my statement; however, my position of authority greatly reduced the possibilities for pushback. From this moment through the rest of the school year, the research topic— self-esteem and racism—was set and there was no further discussion about racism in the family. The group ended up conducting interviews and surveys about the topic in the school, ultimately finding that the school did little to support students’ self-esteem as related to their racial and ethnic identity. It is difficult to ascertain what would have happened had I supported Teresa’s research idea and Cesar’s idea to combine her topic with the topic of self- esteem related to racism. Perhaps this would have led to a research project on colorism or familial inculcation of racism, which would have directly aligned with Teresa’s experience and provided insights applicable to school spaces. However, that cannot be known. Neither do I know Teresa or Cesar’s views of my actions. Regardless, it is clear that I failed to critically reflect on my positionality as a white person in a position of authority as I constrained deliberative decision-making among youth of Color in a way that aligned with my agenda (conducting a research project that would lead to concrete implications for schools).
Reinforcing Adultism
This story is not intended to diminish the agency and decision-making of the youth in the YPAR project. In this incident and throughout the project, they made
Bertrand et al. 13
would create a new institutional space for students to be able to exercise decision-making over their own educational trajectory. For instance, they could use this knowledge to advocate for different course placement. While this youth-inspired focus did contribute to educational research knowledge that challenges adultism, its impact on the everyday lives of students at Eastbrook was muted by adultism that I could have done more to challenge.
The First Moment of Silence
I first broached the topic of exit and entry criteria with Ms. Johnson in a broader discussion about what she identified as student disengagement. I shared with her the students’ concerns about being unaware of how they were placed in the class, confusion as to how to exit, and frustration at being in reading intervention with READ 180 for multiple years. She explained that the entry criteria were outside of her purview, but that she had a clear set of exit criteria. These exit criteria included a Lexile score of 1100, “good” grades, and “good” behavior in reading intervention. It was at this moment that I chose to remain silent in the face of explicit, systemic adultism. In addi- tion to the fact that exit criteria were based entirely on adult conceptions, reflecting the adultism of the institutionalized criteria, the pronouncement overlooked the fact that, over the course of the study, Ms. Johnson shared three different sets of exit criteria with me. These shifting criteria had never been shared with the students. Rather than naming the absence of student input and the shifting criteria that reinforced adultism and constrained students’ ability to advocate for themselves within the institution (Brooks & Alvarado, 2019; Butler, 2016), I remained silent. I did not want to create an antagonistic relationship between Ms. Johnson and myself, where she felt I was critiquing her after she had invited me into her classroom. My silence reflected my recognition that if I brought data into the conversation that contradicted what she shared that she may prevent me from returning to her classroom, thereby ending the research project. As a result, I suggested that she write and post exit criteria so that students could know what was expected. Pending approval from the principal, she agreed to this change. I created a plan that would provide change for future students without directly challenging Ms. Johnson. I hoped that I could eventually be explicit in challeng- ing adultism after developing a more sustained relationship with Ms. Johnson.
The Second Moment of Silence
Ms. Johnson and I organized a meeting with the principal to get her approval to post exit criteria. This meeting centered on a report that I wrote that
14 Urban Education 00(0)
highlighted the concerns of the students; however, the report was framed in Ms. Johnson’s language about student disengagement. It was through this emphasis on disengagement that I sought to form an alliance with Ms. Johnson and highlight students’ concerns. Three different key topics were brought forth: (1) 25% of participating students had been in reading interven- tion that used READ 180 for three or more years, (2) entry to reading inter- vention was based on a single assessment, which was not designed as a placement test and students were unaware of its purpose, and (3) the exit criteria were unclear to students. I chose to withhold the detail about Ms. Johnson changing exit criteria as part of the cause of students’ confusion because I wanted to maintain a collaborative relationship with her. In response to these concerns, the principal explained that READ 180 was adopted by the district and that another type of curriculum could not be used. In recognizing that this major curriculum change had been shut down, I decided to focus solely on the entry and exit criteria. I offered to work with Ms. Johnson in identifying placement criteria for reading intervention that relied on more than one piece of evidence and that were better aligned to make high-stakes decisions. The principal then denied that this was how placement decisions were made, even though it contradicted the information provided by the administrator in charge of making the decisions about course placement. At this moment, in an effort to continue to do research and hope- fully impact change within the school, I remained silent because I did not want the principal to see me as challenging her authority. I wanted her to see me as an ally to build an on-going relationship around instructional change. Akin to my previous decision to remain silent with Ms. Johnson, the goal of developing a long-term relationship in which I could collect data and work toward what I envisioned as more systemic change meant that I did not want to be seen as pushing too hard. The principal’s denial and my refusal to explicitly challenge her denial meant that this opportunity for changing entry criteria was closed. The entry criteria could not be changed if there was a silence about the current prac- tices. Again, I remained silent and thus complicit with institutionalized adultism that denied the lived experience of youth and created barriers to youth educational decision-making.
Missed Opportunities
Fortunately, the principal did leave one pathway open for systemic reform. She explained that Ms. Johnson could decide what the exit criteria were and share this information with students. Therefore, my task changed to supporting Ms. Johnson in making these criteria explicit and more equitable for students.
16 Urban Education 00(0)
systems. The restrictive nature of state curriculum requirements, district testing policies, school unit and lesson plan mandates, and administrator walk-throughs limited possibilities for positioning youth as researchers and creators of their own curriculum. Below I share how I redesigned my class- room to channel youth’s choice in education decisions, rejecting the view that only adults can/should create curriculum. I share the struggles and vic- tories of a 12-week independent study my sixth-grade students and I con- ducted in my language arts classroom. We called it The Passion Project.
The Backstory: Inspiration to Shift toward Youth-Centered
Curriculum
When I was a teacher, my positionality significantly impacted how I navi- gated enhancing youth decision-making in curriculum. I identify as a bira- cial (Puerto Rican and white), cis-gender, heterosexual woman who was raised by divorced parents with distinctly different socioeconomic statuses (low and high). I taught at a middle school located in an urban area in Texas where the majority of students came from low-income and Latinx back- grounds. I was one of the few teachers at the school with Latinx roots and I often drew on my own Puerto Rican background to connect with students and build rapport. I spoke enough Spanish to interact authentically with my students and be valued as an asset to my administrators, while my light phe- notype left me racially ambiguous enough to never truly experience what life is like as a person of Color. My insider status as a teacher allowed me to witness how these students of Color were often given irrelevant texts and curriculum that didn’t connect with their own lives. For example, the library housed books about skiing and European travel, while most of my Latinx students had never seen snow or been on an airplane. As teachers do, I began to look outward for instructional materials that would captivate and inspire my students to learn. Over time I realized what I needed to do was to look inside the classroom to view youth as contributors to their learning and value each of their lived experiences as a primary classroom resource. Prior to The Passion Project, I completed my master’s degree and a case study about one of my own students, Raúl. As a teacher-researcher, I gained a deep insight into how he perceived our school’s learning environment. Raúl described in our interviews feeling that most “teachers were just out to get you,” that “teachers just don’t understand us,” and “school wasn’t fun.” As I reflected on his transcripts, I realized Raúl felt criminalized, misunder- stood, and disengaged from his learning. Our conversation illuminated how
Bertrand et al. 17
youth are merely treated as receptacles for deposits by adult figures (Freire, 2000) who assume the ultimate power, knowledge, and choice. I did not know how to make change in every classroom, but I knew I wanted to make a change in my classroom that accounted for his feedback. With only the spring semester remaining, I began to research ways to challenge adult- centered curriculum by making space for student choice, agency and power during instructional time. Concurrently, my aim to promote student participation in curricular decision- making conflicted with the messages from the school district. Prior to beginning The Passion Project, the school district had released a memoran- dum announcing teacher bonuses based on student achievement scores on the end-of-year state assessments. The bonus foreshadowed the adultist nature of many teachers’ future curriculum and instruction design: test preparation. Due to its unprecedented nature, a teacher frenzy ensued with everyone eager to bite the dangling carrot. Despite the pressures to have my students perform well on yet another standardized test, I continued to reflect on how I could approach my teaching in a way that centered youth influence in education decisions. I thought of students like Raúl who felt stripped of enthusiasm and power and the many others who felt the same. I had to make a choice: adhere to an intense test preparation that would potentially secure a bonus or try something I’ve never done before. Instead of focusing on the test, student scores, or a bonus, I took a risk and conducted The Passion Project with my students.
The Benefits and Challenges of Implementing Youth-Centered
Curriculum
I entered my sixth-grade classroom eager to unveil The Passion Project. As the title suggests, the project would invite students to choose a research topic or problem they are passionate about. Students would study their topic of interest and create a final product to present in a showcase to their peers. Quickly I was faced with a dilemma: What if students don’t know what they are passionate about? I witnessed both excitement and confusion rapidly spread across my students’ faces. “Miss, so like anything? We get to choose?” one of my students responded dumbfoundedly. It was as if they were never asked to contribute to sanctioned education decisions at school before. I confess, the process was cumbersome and I constantly battled the adult in me, struggling to find the balance between “staying on track” and offering youth the space and time to explore for themselves. Similar to Winn and Winn (2016), I anticipated for youth to immediately assume leadership
Bertrand et al. 19
My experience with The Passion Project provides a nuanced example of a successful challenge to adultism and a missed opportunity to contribute to systemic change. In its essence, it was still one project, initiated by an adult, facilitated by an adult, and evaluated by an adult. Yes, my students and I experienced overlapping success, appreciated by us at a personal level and by our administrators at the federal/state level; however, the achievement wasn’t implemented subsequently in other classrooms. In other words, the victory was fleeting and unable to effect change to future youth-driven learning at the school, district, state, or federal level. My pursuit to include youth in curricu- lum design resulted in a singular success, one that lacked long-term commit- ment and stamina to challenge the adultist practices and policies ever-present within our educational sphere.
Discussion
Our stories illustrate how we challenged adultism in some ways but missed opportunities to do so in other ways. We share these candid stories in order to suggest ways that educational researchers and practitioners can challenge adultism, racism, and other intersecting forms of oppression that constrain the inclusion of youth of Color in school- and district-level educational deci- sion-making in urban and urbanizing schools. Aligning with the contribu- tions of scholarship on youth voice, YPAR, and youth activism, as researchers, educators, and practitioners, we believe in the in the inherent value of the experiential knowledge of youth and call for youth perspectives to influence school- and district-level decision-making and policies. Yet our storytelling highlights the ways in which we can work toward making our belief systems and actions congruous. Our stories illustrate how adultism is manifested in in various ways, from interactions, to institutional practices and policies, and to the curriculum, which is greatly influenced by state and federal accountability policies. Within our school systems, adults have more power than youth—particularly youth of Color and other identities that are marginalized within the school system. As Melanie’s story indicates, adultism and white dominance is repro- duced in moment-to-moment interactions, even within the context of projects that intend to challenge youth-adult hierarchies. Maneka’s story illustrates that how an equity-oriented researcher navigates adult-to-adult relationships can contribute to reinforcing the school-level adultism that she sought to dis- mantle. Ashley’s story points to the ways that state and federal accountability standards and neoliberal reforms, such as teacher bonuses tied to student test performance, drive this adultism in the classroom via curriculum standards and pedagogical approaches. As such, our stories document the interpersonal
20 Urban Education 00(0)
and systemic nature of adultism and the way in which “well-meaning” adults can engage in these practices. Nevertheless, these stories illustrate possibilities for disrupting the adultism that constrains school- and district-level youth decision-making. Melanie’s story, though an example of adultism, suggests that, just as adultism can be reproduced in the moment, so can it be disrupted, resulting in more inclusive decision-making. Maneka’s story suggests that challenging institu- tional adultism requires enacting multiple theories of change that engage youth, school-affiliated adults, and university researchers’ positionalities and strengths. This flexibility is necessary because of the sociopolitical dynamics that can impact youth in urban and urbanizing schools, like teacher and administrator turnover. And Ashley’s story demonstrates that even state- and federal-level adultism—in the form of adult-created and Eurocentric curricu- lum driven by state and federal accountability policies—can be challenged by an individual teacher who seeks to center youth decision-making in the curriculum. This type of disruption occurs when adults who participate in the educational system explicitly contend with the multifaceted nature of adultism and how it impacts various youth groups differentially in order to create more equitable schooling environments. Specifically, our stories illustrate that challenging adultism—especially in the context of the education of youth of Color and/or those marginalized by other forms of difference—requires a consideration of our (researchers’ and practitioners’) power. This article focuses on the consequences of power relations in constraining youth’s inclusion in decision-making in urban and urbanizing settings. One major finding that occurs across all three of the stories is the need for adults to decenter their adultist perspectives to create a space for young people. Overall, for practitioners and researchers, our stories show the importance of ceding power when working alongside youth, exert- ing power with fellow adults, and maintaining critical reflexivity (Bang & Vossoughi, 2016), which requires a re-envisioning of action based on new understandings (p. 181). However, due to adults’ formal positions, they must often set parameters for youth, which complicates the act of ceding power. Hence, part of this critical reflexivity should involve researchers and practi- tioners being hyper-aware of their motivations that may compete with the desire to challenge the adultism that constrains school- and district-level youth educational decision-making. The act of listening and letting students lead as a way of centering youth’s perspectives can be particularly difficult for academic researchers who are pushed by the university to focus on a coherent research agenda. In both Maneka and Melanie’s stories, we see how the university pressure to create a sustained line of research at times led them to push past what students wanted
Adultismo - xxxxx
Asignatura: Introducción A La Investigación
Universidad: Universidad de Chile
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones
¿Por qué está desenfocada esta página?
Esta es una vista previa
Accede a todos los documentos
Consigue descargas ilimitadas
Mejora tus calificaciones