Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies (JCACS)

Donald
					, Dwayne Trevor

English

Edmonton Pentimento
Re-Reading History in the Case of the Papaschase Cree

Campbell
					, A. Nettie

Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies
Volume 2    Number  1   Spring 2004
269
JOY as a Metaphor of Convergence
By D. D. Liston (2001)
Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
A Book Review
A. NETTIE CAMPBELL
Senior Consultant
“What more interesting topic is there than the one who are we? And what
might we be/become?’ (p. 218).
These questions are addressed in Delores D. Liston’s book, JOY As a
Metaphor of Convergence (2001). Her concern is a timely one, given our
current crumbling social and educational foundations, coupled with the
trend for many educators to think primarily in terms of test results and
future earning power of students.
The author describes a world view that centers on joy, a world view
that ignites her own awareness, vitality, possibilities, and expanding
boundaries, and which guides her pathway as an educator. She claims
that is natural to be joyful, healthy, and creative, and that joy in
educational context restores the quest of learning. Joy is viewed as
making us kinder and more compassionate, as well as inspiring us with
the ardent wish to draw others into the same joy.
The author’s use of language highlights the pertinence,
consequences, and seriousness in her call: “The way we experience our
world is tied to the way we imagine it” (p. 186). And “the imaginings and
creations generated through joy will lead to joyful lives for all human
beings” (p. 22). Thus, she presents joy as a metaphor of convergence “to
Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies
270
change our collective and individual vision of what might be” (p. 218).
Her choice of “metaphor” is spelled out in this way:
The metaphors we use to form the context of our interpretations have a
profound influence on our experiences and behavior.  For example, the
factory metaphor is the predominant metaphor in use in education at the
present moment… Therefore, I claim the only way to bring change is to
modify or reconstruct the metaphors that shape the interpretations of our
experience (p. 7).
 The factory metaphor fails to acknowledge, for example, that a) learners
construct their own knowledge and know more than tests might reveal,
b) teachers day-to-day encounters with them take place in the political,
cultural, moral, and spiritual landscapes of their learning, and c)
ownership for school reform reaches beyond the school into society itself.
Thus, for moving beyond the Cartesian dualism, paradox, and uncaring
encounters with self and others, the author calls for educators to adapt a
metaphor of joy as convergence to change. It invites teachers to take
courage in encountering students in the process of making meaning of
the spiritual, emotional, intellectual, physical dimensions of life while
also exploring possibilities within the acknowledged landscapes in which
their encounters actually take place. Joy as a metaphor of convergence
also connects educational content with the lives of teachers and students
as they co-create (through experience) both their curricula and their
teaching-learning environments—imbuing the individual with unique
responsibilities during the process. Although the author intentionally
does not prescribe the “how to” possibilities, she suggests assembling
around common interests, self-supporting groups, communities of caring
and compassionate learners, and innovative learning centers. In such
assembling, diversity and dialoguing for creating meaningful and
exciting lives joyfully contribute toward the emergence of a better
humanity. The author cautions, however, that the challenge is not easy,
given such extraneous measures as accountability, and “for the moment,
Joy remains outside the context of most school experience” (p. 216). Thus,
she advises beginning with what is most feasible, while focusing on
change in our thinking-being.
This book brings together numerous and diverse writings for
demonstrating convergence, which can be seen in the three parts of the
book: “Joy: On the Way to Understanding”; “Joy: Metaphors from Computer
Science, Neuroscience, and Quantum Physics”; and “Joy: In Context”. In her
call for educational change, the author adds her voice to those of
important curriculum thinkers and practitioners such as John Dewey
(1960) and Maria Montessori (1949) to Maxine Greene (1996), Paulo Friere
(1995), and David Purpel (1988). This book will have special appeal for
educators who are willing to focus on the deep questions regarding what
it means to be human and how we might live and learn together.
Book Review
A. NETTIE CAMPBELL
271
References
Dewey, J. (1960).  How to think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to
the Educative Process.  Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Friere, P. (1995). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed. New York:
Continuum.
Greene, M. (1996).  Knowing and Being:  Essays by Michael Polyani.   Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Liston, D. D. (2001). JOY as a Metaphor of Convergence. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton
Press, Inc.
Montessori, M. (1949). The absorbent mind. New York: Dell (1967 edn.)
Purpel, David (1988). The moral and spiritual crisis in education: A curriculum for
justice and comparison in education. New York: Bergin and Garvey.
Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies
272


Joy as a Metaphor of Convergence by D. D. Liston

Dion
					, Susan D.

(Re)telling to Disrupt:
Aboriginal People and Stories of Canadian History

De Freitas
					, Elizabeth

(Dis)locating Gender Within the Universal: Teaching Philosophy
Through Narrative

Oberg
					, Antoinette

Supervision as a Creative Act

Rich
					, Sharon J.

Restoring Power to Teachers: The Impact of “Whole Language”

JCAC Editor

Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies
Volume 2    Number  1   Spring 2004
273
Notes on Contributors
A. NETTIE CAMPBELL is a curriculum theorist, and is completing a
book on the theory of Care-Empowering Education, which enhances
Noddings’ theory of care. Nettie has had teaching experience at the
University of Toronto, the University of Saskatchewan, and the
University of Prince Edward Island, and is looking forward to teaching
two graduate courses at a different university this summer.
campbell@oise.utoronto.ca
CYNTHIA CHAMBERS is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of
Education at The University of Lethbridge where she teaches curriculum
studies in the graduate (M.Ed.) program, and literacy, Indigenous
peoples, and general teacher education in the undergraduate (B.Ed.)
program. Chambers is also adjunct professor at the University of Victoria
and taught several summers in the UVIC Curriculum Studies
programme. chambers@uleth.ca.
MICHAEL R. DION is a man of mixed Aboriginal (Lenape/Potawatami)
and non-Aboriginal (Irish/French) ancestry, is an independent writer in
Toronto. Michael is an active volunteer working with the disabled
woman's network and non-profit housing. He especially enjoys sharing
the responsibilities of childcare with friends and relatives. In his current
writing, Michael is exploring stories that address the complexities and
implications of living with HIV. He is particularly interested in what it
means to manage the cocktail while maintaining a productive life as a
contributing member of the social world.
SUSAN D. DION is a woman of mixed Aboriginal (Lenape/Potawatami)
and non-Aboriginal (Irish/French) ancestry, and is an Assistant Professor
in the Faculty of Education at York University in Toronto. She has been
working in the field of education for twenty years. In her research, Susan
investigates the issues and challenges involved in teaching and learning
from the history of the relationship between Aboriginal people and
Canadians. sdion@edu.yorku.ca
DWAYNE TREVOR DONALD is a PhD student in the Department of
Secondary Education at The University of Alberta, Edmonton. He was a
social studies teacher for ten years at Kainai High School on the Kainai
(Blood) Reserve. The focus of his research is re-reading and re-framing
historical and contemporary interactions between Aboriginal and non-
Aboriginal people in Canada to facilitate intercultural dialogue. His
Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies
274
current research has led him to forward a curriculum theory of
Indigenous Metissage. ddonald@ualberta.ca
HELEN HARPER is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Education,
University of Western Ontario. She teaches courses on Critical and
Cultural studies; English Studies and Feminist Studies in education. Her
current research interests are focused on the historical and contemporary
organization and production of white, female teacher identity in variety
of pedagogical contexts. harper@uwo.ca
LINDA LAIDLAW is an Assistant Professor in early literacy education at
the University of Alberta. Her current work examines diverse literacy
experiences of young children, informed by frames offered by
hermeneutic inquiry and complexity science. llaidlaw@ualberta.ca
MARGARET MACINTYRE LATTA is an Assistant Professor in the
College of Education & Human Sciences at the University of Nebraska-
Lincoln.  She is a former art and English K-12 teacher who completed her
PhD at the University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada in 2000.  Currently, she
teaches curriculum classes oriented toward aesthetic considerations
emphasizing neglected epistemological assumptions in cross-disciplinary
teaching and learning.  Her research interests include teacher education
reform and transformation through the arts. mlatta2@unl.edu
DAO LUU is enrolled in the Secondary Social Studies program in the
Master's of Teaching program at the University of Calgary.
LORRI NEILSEN GLENN'S first book of poetry won the 2003 Poets'
Corner Award. She is the author and co-editor of six books on literacy
and arts-informed inquiry including Knowing Her Place (1998) which
won NCTE's 1999 Meade Award for outstanding research. She teaches at
Mount Saint Vincent University in Halifax where she is researching
women and writing and is currently working on a collection of essays,
among other projects. lorri.neilsen@msvu.ca
ANTOINETTE OBERG is Associate Professor and Graduate Advisor in
the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at the University of
Victoria. Her research focuses on the relation of theory to experience in
the practice of inquiry and on practices of interpretation, especially in
hermeneutics, phenomenology, and autobiographical narrative. She
teaches graduate courses in curriculum theory and interpretive inquiry.
aoberg@uvic.ca
Contributors
275
ANNE PHELAN is Associate Professor of Curriculum Studies and
Director of the Professional Education Research Centre at the University
of Calgary. Her research and teaching interests include curriculum
studies and professional education (in the fields of education, medicine,
nursing and social work). amphelan@ucalgary.ca
JÉRÔME PROULX is a first year doctoral student in Mathematics
Education in the Department of Secondary Education at the University of
Alberta. His principal research interests are concerned with mathematics
teacher education (pre-service and in-service) and the study of theories of
learning. jproulx@ualberta.ca
DENNIS SUMARA is Professor of Curriculum Studies and Teacher
Education in the Faculty of Education at the University of Alberta. He is
also President of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies. His
most recent book is entitled "Why Reading Literature in School Still
Matters: Imagination, Interpretation, Insight", and was the winner of the
2003 National Reading Conference Ed Fry Book Award.
dsumara@ualberta.ca
RENA UPITIS is Professor of Arts Education at Queen’s University,
where she teaches courses on music curriculum methods and on research
methodologies. A musician and composer, she worked as a music teacher
in inner city schools in Canada and the United States and has been a
studio teacher of piano and music theory for over 30 years. Her research
interests include music and mathematics education, and teacher
and student transformation through the arts. upitisr@educ.queensu.ca
SUSAN CASEY WALSH has taught courses in language and literacy at
the University of Alberta for a number of years.  Her research interests
include: language and representation, feminist poststructuralism,
spirituality, gender and teaching, arts-informed research, and writing as
inquiry.   Her dissertation was honored with the Phi Delta Kappa/
Faculty of Education Dissertation Award (2003) at the University of
Alberta and was also shortlisted for the Canadian Association for
Curriculum Studies Outstanding Dissertation Award (2003).  She has
recently been appointed to a position in Literacy Education at Mount
Saint Vincent University. walsh@ualberta.ca
Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies
276


Contributors

Deluca
					, Sandy

85
Sharon Who Tells Stories
SANDY DELUCA
Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies
Volume 2  Number 2  Fall 2004
Sharon Who Tells Stories
SANDY DELUCA
University of Western Ontario
As a mature woman who chose to return to graduate studies in the early
1990’s, I forged ahead toward my goal armed with fortitude and a resolve
that I was doing this one for me. I had been, at that time, a professor of
nursing education for over 20 years and had been engulfed in a system
known for its firmly imbedded notions of what it meant to do “good” sci-
entific research in the ways of the forefathers—literally speaking. I did not
want more of the same, knowing always that there were many ways to see
and understand health care, education, the world, and the people who in-
habit it.
I met Sharon Rich in a narrative inquiry course where she spoke a lan-
guage of inquiry familiar to my understanding of what it means to ask rel-
evant questions. Sharon supported my pursuit of the questions for which I
held a passion, questions that ultimately took the shape of a master’s re-
search study lit with wonder toward and a respect for the messiness and
complexity of the human condition. My initial work with critical narrative
inquiry subsequently extended into doctoral research and continues to live
within my work with nursing students and graduate health professionals.
Why do I share that story? Imbedded in the text is a wealth of insight
into Sharon’s work as teacher…mentor…storylady. I was asked to write a
piece for this special issue about Sharon’s teaching. After asking what form
this piece must take, I became quite aware that, no matter what directions I
was given, the form would grow in a way that was indicative of the par-
86
Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies
ticularity of Sharon’s personal/professional self as teacher as well as of the
particularity of our own personal/ professional relationship.
The particularity to which I refer is perhaps captured by her response to
a question asked of her by the facilitator of a collaborative nursing faculty
development conference. I invited Sharon to give a keynote address on trans-
formative learning. The facilitator asked Sharon the manner in which she
would like to be introduced. Her response was, “Just introduce me as Sharon
who tells stories.” I was not surprised as she is a master (mistress?) of un-
derstatement. In fact understatement describes well Sharon’s teaching ways.
Sometimes when the self of the teacher is alive in one’s teaching ways, it
may appear to others that the person is perhaps simply a natural teacher.
Yet there is nothing more complex and understated than simplicity. What
appears natural is intentional and deliberate.
Sharon celebrates voice. Her mentorship does not trample on the self of
her students. She has a way with mentoring/teaching that provides schol-
arly support for one’s work, unwavering interest in one’s thoughts and frus-
trations surrounding the process of writing or learning, and a strong re-
spect for voice. In fact in celebrating the voice of her students, she also urges
her students to do the same within their work, and within the words and
spaces of their writing. In turn, Sharon takes it as her work to ensure that
one’s voice will make sense to the academic world.
Sharon celebrates community. Her teaching ways are inclusive, not only
of differences of opinion, but of differences of food and drink preference. I
say this not with tongue in cheek (well, perhaps just a bit), but with great
sincerity. Her community is one that not only shares scholarly ideas, but in
addition shares place and food. Her community of learners share gather-
ings where ideas, as well as the self of the learner, are nurtured (and fed).
Gatherings are fertile grounds. As Madeleine Grumet (1988) notes, “theory
grows where it is planted, soaking up the nutrients in the local soil, turning
to the local light” (p. 14). So does learning. Personal and academic peer
support are powerful educational fertilizers. Sharon is a substantial spreader.
When it is time for graduate students to fly, they do so with double
vision…one eye toward their goal and one eye holding fast to the commu-
nity from which they emerge.
Sharon celebrates the wild things…innovative ideas living on the mar-
gins of mainstream educational thought, the view from below, and as well,
the view she may not entirely share. In fact it was this celebration of the
wild things that drew me to her advisement for my master’s work. At the
time, uncovering the passion in nursing education (my master’s thesis topic)
was not a mainstream idea within the nursing research community; and
yet, the likes of Maxine Greene, Bill Pinar and Madeleine Grumet wandered
about educational thought at that time. I was drawn to their ideas surround-
87
Sharon Who Tells Stories
SANDY DELUCA
ing passion and possibility. I heard these names in Sharon’s narrative re-
search course. I felt I was home.
Sharon celebrates story . . . the story that each individual enacts within
their own teaching and personal life, the connections of all these things that
make a student a teacher, a scholar, a researcher, a person. This storylady
offers to her students a respect for their own context and history that lives
within the text of their work. At times she assists her students to pry and
prod and haul their story from the liminal spaces of their text in order to
make visible that which gives one’s writing energy, passion, and wide-
awakeness, and as well, heart.
Sharon celebrates dialogue and discourse, most importantly un-sani-
tized. In an academic setting described by Johnson (1995) as being
enamoured of deodorized and disinfected language, Sharon supports the
messiness of mundane as well as academic conversation, or of what Johnson
refers to as “an unholy union of academic and vernacular language” (p.
129). Tarule (1996) describes discourse or interpretive communities as “sites in
which knowledge is produced, reproduced, and contested” (p. 286) where
“knowledge production, like dialogue, becomes a shifting and unstable
process” (p. 286). In a place where thoughts and ideas may grow where they
are planted, weeds and wildflowers are honoured. In this academic/personal
space, conversation wanders where it may as academic ideas lolly for a
while. For a while is a key point. There are boundaries. Sharon sees it as her
work and wisdom to apply these at critical points in the student –scholar’s
academic life, usually with the intent of assisting her students to navigate
the political realities of obtaining the degree. Accompanying the work of
pacing students’ writing lives is a reminder that this particular thesis is not
necessarily a student’s life’s work; and yes, there is life beyond academia.
There are drawbacks to Sharon’s teaching ways, yet the drawback of a
mentoring style such as Sharon’s is actually a strength in disguise. When
one’s academic life centers around the sparking and “flame-maintenance”
of another (her students), one risks being unrecognized by the academic
world at large, where glory tends to drift toward the vocal known. This is
unfortunate and begs the question why? I have been pondering this con-
tinually during the writing of this piece. Other than considering the usual
answers that circumnavigate the mundane realities of academia, I am chal-
lenged to understand this from a more personal/cultural perspective. I had
just finished reading a piece written by Mary Canales (2000), a professor of
nursing, when I realized that her words might offer me a way of thinking
about Sharon’s (and others’) teaching ways.
Canales (2000) “proposes a theoretical framework for analyzing how
we engage with [others], those perceived as different from self” (p. 16).
Canales developed her framework as a result of her doctoral research which
88
Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies
explored teaching practices of a select group of doctorally-prepared Latina
nursing faculty. What is of particular interest to me is the way in which
Canales began to see the process of othering as a central dimension of her
participants’ lives and as influencing their teaching practice. Her interest
stemmed from her own experiences of “exclusionary othering” (p. 19) dur-
ing her nursing education and in particular her doctoral program. As a re-
sult of her research, Canales conceptualized othering as two categories: ex-
clusionary and inclusionary. Whereas Canales recognizes that “both pro-
cesses exist within the context of power and power relationships” (p. 19)
what she describes as exclusionary othering “often uses power within rela-
tionships for domination and subordination” (p. 19). The consequences of
this form of othering are obvious—alienation, marginalization, decreased
opportunities—all of which may have untoward consequences in relation
to human development and maintenance of self-esteem (p. 19).
Canales (2000) contrasts inclusionary othering as a “process that attempts
to utilize power within relationships for transformation and coalition build-
ing” (p. 19). Canales suggests that inclusionary othering practices result in
“consciousness raising, sense of community, shared power, and inclusion”
(p. 25). Sharon’s teaching celebrates the difference of each individual with
whom she works. Sharon is a “world”-traveler in the way that Lugones
(1990) describes, traveling to the “worlds” of others through their stories,
engaging with the texts of her students, creating meaning places where she
and her students may be “fully subjects to each other” (p. 401).
Canales’ research draws on Collin’s (cited in Canales, 2000) analysis of
Black women’s experiences and how their relationships exemplify different
ways of being with others. Canales finds that the Black women in Collin’s
study have established “connected communities” (p. 26) that “challenge the
mythic heterosexual, married couple, nuclear family norm that continues to
pervade US society” (p. 26). The community of Black women Collin studies
take on roles as “bloodmothers, othermothers, and community othermothers”
(p. 26). Through Canales’ reading of Collins, I realized a cultural way of life
that is evident within certain cultural groups, perhaps a more familial way
of relating, not necessarily as common in mainstream academia. Academia
represents a particular culture that exists within a larger culture of local com-
munity. Often that culture of academe is perceived by graduate students as
chilly and other-oriented—or to which Canales would perhaps refer as an
exclusionary orientation. What is noteworthy in the Collin’s study is a re-
minder of a more relational way of being with another, perhaps not as domi-
nant within the larger culture. This insight helps me to better understand
Sharon’s teaching ways; they are familial ways that may challenge mythic
notions of scholarly support and respect for difference idealized in main-
stream academe. Perhaps this is a reason why Sharon’s teaching is not nec-
89
Sharon Who Tells Stories
SANDY DELUCA
essarily visible to the academic universe at large. The values that underlie
her teaching do not live out there. Sharon is a participant, a co-learner (as she
herself would describe), one aspect of a whole. Sharon’s teaching lives within
the community of dialogue and story of those with whom she works.
Sharon celebrates the “personal.” I enclose in quotes as I use the word in
the way of Grumet (1995). Grumet asserts that the “personal is a perfor-
mance, an appearance contrived for the public”(p. 37), a mask that enables
one to perform the “play of pedagogy” (p. 37). As I listened to Sharon dur-
ing the aforementioned faculty development conference, I was aware that I
was not solely listening. I was watching. Now that may not seem a pro-
found insight, yet the question of why one is drawn to simply listening to
certain speakers/teachers versus listening/watching others in order to gather
their wisdoms for further usage continued to bother me. I recalled Grumet’s
dislike of the word personal, and her “enactment” of a paper (Grumet, 1995)
presented at a conference with her green robe (that which she thinks about
when she hears the word personal) hung for all to see. The point she was
making was that her scholae personae (her pedagogical wardrobe) simulta-
neously “conceals and reveals [her] leaks” (p. 44). Sharon wore a red hat at
our conference. I would venture to say that the red hat conceals and reveals
her leaks. She wears and is that hat. It covers and it tells. There is mystery.
Frank (1995) suggests that the “desire of the students is for the speech of the
animator’s self—not the spoken text the animator presents…but the speech
of what animates that text” (p. 32). Perhaps that is why a student looks. When
one watches a teacher passionately perform the text(s), inevitably one catches
glimpses of the self of the performer and wants more . . . perhaps to emulate,
perhaps to consult, perhaps to find common ground or place to share ideas.
Sharon’s performance of her pedagogy is indeed personal/professional as
is her mentoring relationship. Her students watch.
However one describes teaching ways of the Storylady with the Red Hat,
the fact is that what is revealed is that Sharon thinks and lives in story. Sharon’s
community of discourse is as a circle of storytellers, leaning inward, listen-
ing, questioning, embracing the messiness of ideas and the self of each per-
son sitting on the floor with legs crossed, mouth agape . . . hearts engaged.
Thank you, Storylady.
References
Canales, M. K. (2000). Othering: Toward an understanding of difference. Advances in
Nursing Science, 22(4), 16–31.
Frank, A. (1995). Lecturing and transference: The undercover work of pedagogy. In J.
Gallop (Ed.), Pedagogy: The question of impersonation (pp. 28–35). Indianapolis, IN:
Indiana University Press.
Grumet, M. (1988). Bitter milk: Women and teaching. Amherst, MA: The University of
90
Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies
Massachusetts Press.
Grumet, M. (1995). Scholae personae: Masks for meaning. In J. Gallop (Ed.), Pedagogy:
The question of impersonation (pp. 36–45). Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press.
Johnson, C. (1995). Disinfecting dialogues. In J. Gallop (Ed.), Pedagogy: The question of
impersonation (pp. 129–137). Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press.
Lugones, M. (1990). Playfulness, “world”-travelling, and loving perception. In G.
Anzaldua (Ed.), Making face, making soul: Haciendo Caras: Creative and critical per-
spectives by feminists of color (pp. 390–402). San Francisco, CA: Aunt Lute Founda-
tion Books.
Tarule, J. M. (1996). Voices in dialogue: Collaborative ways of knowing. In N. Goldberger,
J. M. Tarule, B. M. Clinchy & M. F. Belenky (Eds.), Knowledge, difference, and power:
Essays inspired by women’s ways of knowing (pp. 274–304). New York: HarperCollins.


Not a member yet

Edmonton Pentimento Re-Reading History in the Case of the Papaschase Cree

Joy as a Metaphor of Convergence by D. D. Liston

(Re)telling to Disrupt: Aboriginal People and Stories of Canadian History

(Dis)locating Gender Within the Universal: Teaching Philosophy Through Narrative

Supervision as a Creative Act

Restoring Power to Teachers: The Impact of “Whole Language”

Contributors

Sharon Who Tells Stories

Research That Matters: Finding A Path with Heart

Taught Bodies: Teasing Prose A Book Review

429

474