Page 100 - EdViewptsSpring2018-web_Neat
P. 100

interactions with students, parents,   in violation of the HIB law, our School   parental push-back. As they note,
      and teachers alike. It is our moral   Climate Teams must proactively foster   if it comes from a child, it “gives
      imperative to make our schools places   inclusive learning environments. Both   you license to talk about a subject
      in which all students, particularly the   HIB and LAD in New Jersey, as well as   that might be considered taboo
      most vulnerable, can thrive.         corresponding Board of Education poli-  or unacceptable” (p. 815). Such
      Theorists in diverse fields of study ex-  cies, create viable legal protections for   “teachable moments” include times
      plore “Othering” as a means of perpet-  educators to explore heteronormativity   in which a child says something like
      uating the oppression of subordinate   and begin to challenge the assump-  “Those are boy clothes” and allow
      societal groups. In addition to race,   tions therein (State New Jersey, 2011;   teachers to ask what that really
      culture, and gender, heterosexuality is   State of New Jersey, 2009).     means. In doing so, teachers create
      a facet of Othering that reinforces “het-  Emerging and Promising         spaces for students to question
      eronormativity,” or the marginalization                                   their assumptions and ideally, begin
      of individuals who do not fit into ste-  Practices                        replacing gendered language with
      reotypical gender roles (Cole, 2009, p.   As an area of study, challenging het-  such statements as “They’re just
      563). Regardless of sexual orientation   eronormativity at the elementary level   pants” or “There are no boy or girl
      or even an awareness thereof, chil-  is in its relative infancy. Few relevant   colors” (pp. 810, 816).
      dren who do not express their gender   published studies exist, and most of   Elementary school leaders can
      in a stereotypical fashion are often the   them are centered upon practices in   also embrace “teachable moments”
      target of bullying and harassment. It is   relative isolation, focusing upon one   to challenge heteronormative
      not enough to be reactive in respond-  school, one teacher, and one class-  assumptions. Once I heightened
      ing to such occurrences. Rather, we   room in each (Payne & Smith, 2014).   my heteronormative awareness, I
      must challenge the heteronormative   Still, the practices that they describe   was struck by how many instances
      assumptions that motivate such bul-  are extremely promising, and there are   throughout my day were unnecessarily
      lying, and as Cole (2009) notes, look   several commonalities among them.   gendered. Although I am a lifelong
      for ways of “undoing gender” in our   The most prominent common thread    athlete, I frequently referred to “the
      educational practices (p. 566) (Lad-  is the use of “critical literacy” to de-  boys” playing football at recess and
      son, Billings & Tate, 1995).         construct texts and confront normative   referred to shorts and a sports jersey
      Yet, this stance is not a comfortable   assumptions. Martino and Cumming-  as “boy clothes.” I used gendered
      one for most educators. Those seek-  Potvin (2016) highlight the use of   words to refer to students congenially.
      ing to challenge heteronormativity at   critical literacy, asserting that “reading   To challenge these assumptions, I
      all academic levels, and particularly   practices are socially performative” and   began using gender-neutral terms,
      in elementary schools, share com-    question “the impulse to normalize”   substituting such common phrases
      mon concerns regarding community     societal assumptions (pp. 809-810).   as “boys and girls” with “my friends.”
      push-back and accusations of having   They also employ literary resources   I also started to discourage gendered
      an “LGBTQ agenda” (Payne & Smith,    that challenge heteronormativity and   delineations among my staff. We have
      2014, p. 405). To assuage these con-  cisgender assumptions, including such   begun to diminish our use of boy/girl
      cerns, Payne and Smith (2014) note   texts as And Tango Makes Three, by   lines at recess, assigning sports or
      the importance of district policies and   Richardson and Parnell (2005), It’s a   colors to a specific gender, and using
      protocols as a means of protection   George Thing, by Bedford (2008), and   gendered terminology with students
      from outside forces.                 My Princess Boy, by Kilodavis (2010).   (Martino & Cumming-Potvin, 2016).
      Fortunately, New Jersey is quite pro-  Through carefully scaffolded lessons   Despite the anxiety, fear, and discomfort
                                           with a specific progression, they use
      gressive in this realm. We have New   these texts to explore gender norms   that this work can create, it is essential
      Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination   and nonconformity. This process allows   that we challenge heteronormativity with
      (LAD), which prohibits discrimination of   students to broaden their perspectives   our youngest students so that we do not
      any kind based upon, among numer-    on varying family structures, love, and   inadvertently reinforce narrow gender
      ous characteristics, a person’s gender   identity. Similar efforts can be seen in   norms that exclude nonconforming
      identity, gender expression, and sexual   the work of Ryan, Patraw, and Bednar   students. Children are never too young
      orientation. Many school districts have   (2013) and Hermann-Wilmarth, Lan-  to think critically about the world around
      adopted policies regarding transgender   nen, and Ryan (2017).            them. Yet, they cannot do it alone. We
      students based upon this law. In addi-                                    as educators lead the way by providing
      tion, the New Jersey State Anti-bullying   Additionally, Martino and Cumming-  the conditions and support for students
      Bill of Rights Act of 2011 (HIB) and the   Potvin (2016) note the importance   to think in this manner. We must act
      corresponding mandated board poli-   of educators taking advantage of     in ways that challenge oppressive
      cies prohibit ostracism of students with   “teachable moments,” using what   norms, employing critical literacy and
      these and other “defining characteris-  comes from students in discussions   capitalizing on “teachable moments” to
      tics.” In addition to enforcing remedia-  as a catalyst for deeper explorations.   challenge heteronormativity. It is through
      tion requirements for students found   These moments also provide an      this work that we will truly care for the
                                           additional layer of protection from   souls of our students.



                                            Educational Viewpoints       -98-       Spring 2018
   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105