Preparing School Leaders to Advance Equity in Computer Science Education
In this episode I unpack Flapan et al.’s (2021) publication titled “Preparing school leaders to advance equity in computer science education,” which provides some suggestions and resources for preparing administrators for advancing equity work in K-12 CS education.
-
Welcome back to another episode of a CSK8 podcast.
My name is Jared O'Leary.
Each episode of this podcast
is either an interview with a guest or multiple guests, or a solo episode
where we unpack some scholarship in relation to computer science education.
And this week's particular episode, I'm
unpacking a paper titled Preparing School Leaders to Advance Equity
in Computer Science Education, and this paper was written by Julie
Flippen, Jean Rue, Roxanna Hadad and John Hudson.
Apologies if I mispronounce any names, by the way.
If one of those names sounds familiar, it's
because Jean was on a previous interview
for this particular podcast, so I highly recommend
checking out that episode if you have not listened to it yet.
I'll include a link to that in the show notes,
which you can find at Jared earlier.
E-Comm where there are hundreds, if not thousands of free X resources,
including link to boot up PD org, which is the nonprofit that I work for,
and I create 100% free coding curriculum that you could use in your classroom.
All right, so here's the abstract for this paper quote, Background and context.
Most large scale statewide initiatives of computer science
for all see US for all movement have focused on the classroom level.
Critical questions remain
about building school and district leadership capacity to support teachers
while implementing equitable computer
science education that is scalable and sustainable.
Objective is statewide research practice partnership involving university
researchers and school leaders from 14 local education agencies.
LGA from district and county offices addresses the following research question
What do administrators identify as most helpful for understanding
issues related to equitable computer science implementation?
When engaging with a guide and workshop,
we collaboratively developed to help leadership in such efforts.
Method participant surveys, interviews and workshop observations were analyzed
to understand best practices for professional development,
supporting educational leaders, findings, administrators, value science,
professional development resources that a have a clear focus on equity
be engaged with data and examples that deepen understandings of equity.
C provide networking opportunities.
D have explicit workshop purposes and activities, and e
support deeper discussions of computer science implementation challenges
through pairing a workshop and a guide implications utilizing
Ishimaru and Galloway's framework for equitable leadership practices.
This study offers an actionable construct for equitable implementation
of computer science, including a how to build equity, leadership and vision.
B how to enact that vision and see how to scale and sustain that vision.
While this construct applies to equitable leadership practices more broadly across
all disciplines, we found this application particularly useful when explicitly
focused on equity leadership practices in computer science, end quote.
All right.
So that was
a little bit longer of an abstract, but it's clearly laid out in the paper itself
for the background and context, objective method, findings
and implications, and is an excellent summary of the paper itself.
And if I were to summarize this particular paper
into a single sentence, I'd actually just go with the title.
So I'd say that this paper is all about preparing school leaders
to advance equity in computer science education.
And by the way, this paper is available for free, at least
it is at the time of this recording, so I highly recommend checking it out.
You can find a direct link to that by going to the show notes at Jared or lyrics
or clicking the link in the app that you're listening to this on
and then simply clicking on the title underneath the article section of
the show notes.
You can also click on the author last names,
and that will take you to some Google Scholar profiles
so you can read some more publications by these authors.
And again, check out the interview with Gene. It's an awesome interview.
Include a link to that in the show notes as well. All right.
So in the introduction, they discuss how there are some inequalities
in terms of percent of people who are participating.
So, for example, like 60% of California high school students, which by the way, is
where like this takes place in California are black latinxs in Latin American
or Alaska Native.
However, only 16% of students taking the apex exam fell within those
demographics, and black students alone only accounted for 1% of test takers.
Another stat that they give out
is that while 50% of the state's high school population are female,
only 29% of them actually ended up taking an introductory course.
Course.
The introduction also talks about three
interlocking factors that contribute to some of the barriers that are going on.
And so these factors are bias, beliefs, technical barriers and policies.
So here's a quote from PDF page four quote The bias belief systems refer
to the stereotypes
educators have about what types of students
are inclined to be good at, since the technical or structural barriers
include how students get placed into different courses
and which curriculum and professional development models are offered policies
at the local, state and national level regarding teacher credentialing,
curriculum standards
and funding can impact the quality and reach of key learning in quote.
Now, the authors go on to say that administrators are in a position
where they can have some kind of an impact on equity
as it relates to education in terms of like the different kind of support
they provide for teachers long term,
as well as some different policies that they can implement or not.
So again, their research question that they're exploring
is they're trying to figure out like what do administrators
think is helpful for trying to have more equitable cease practices
in their schools that they work in.
So the next section of this paper
is on the literature review and theoretical framework.
And the framework that that you're using again
is Shimura and Galloway's framework on equitable leadership practices.
So here are some quotes of the different types
of practices that they recommend in this particular framework.
So this is from page three, quote, Constructing and enacting and equity
vision supervising for equitable teaching and learning, developing
organizational leadership for equity, fostering an equitable school culture,
allocating resources, hiring and placing personnel, collaborating with families
and communities, engaging in self-reflection and growth for equity
modeling and influencing the socio political context.
So they do have like a sentence for each one of these that kind of unpacks
what each of those are.
But each one of these ideas, again, going back to the episode that released
two weeks ago, can apply to anyone in a CSS education
position because odds are you are a leader in your school or in your community.
On science education,
you might be the only person in your school or area
who's actually doing computer science education.
And while this particular paper and the CSS equity
guide that is included in the show notes might be extremely useful for your admin,
it might also be beneficial for you who is also a leader in CSS education.
Okay, so the next section is on the study context.
So this is basically saying that they worked in California.
So all of the findings are in California.
So it's not like generalizable like, hey,
everybody and every single state will feel the exact same way,
not what they're saying at all.
It's also through a research practitioner
partnership, which means that like practitioner is like admin or teachers
or community and stakeholders are working in collaboration with researchers.
And so the initial project involved collaboration with administrators
and learning from them
in order to create this course equity guide that I mentioned.
That again is link to in the show notes.
Now this equity guide at
the moment is 63 pages, and I say that because they are continuing to revise,
at least that's how it sounds.
And inside
this guide it has an introduction on like what is this guide, Who is this for?
How can I use this thing?
And then provide some suggestions for program design and development.
For example,
answering questions like, Does computer science have its own standards?
What about data science or cybersecurity, etc.?
Then it goes into a section on students and recruitment,
and it has a section on what it looks like in the classroom,
like how should computer science be taught?
And what about for distance learning or remote learning?
And it goes into a section on preparing and supporting teachers
like who should I hire to stage computer science?
That one's an important one.
What kind of training do administrators need?
How do I evaluate computer science, teachers, etc.
And it has sections on funding, family and community industry, extended
learning time opportunities,
and then some more information like some other resources and whatnot.
So this is a very practical guide that I highly recommend for any administrator
or anyone in science education who is a leader who wants to help others
learn more about science education, especially in relation to equity.
Okay, So that's the first thing that they developed.
Then they took that guide and they gave it to administrators
and encouraged them to read it and then they would unpack different parts
of the guide or questions in an administrator workshop,
which was a one day workshop for school leaders from the various school,
district and county administration roles in California.
Following these workshops, the researchers then went back and revise the guide,
so they continued to update it with feedback from the administrators.
So it was this continuous improvement cycle.
Now the next section is on the research methods.
And so they had a variety of data that they used for this.
So they had meeting notes and recordings.
They had some different documents
that were like Google Docs, collaborative documents.
They had field notes
from the observations, they had the surveys from the workshops,
and then they also had interviews with some different
and then they went through and analyzed that data, coded it
not like computer programing, but like coded it as in like assigned
some different labels or codes to say, Hey, they were talking about this on here.
So that way they can kind of generalize.
Oh, this is what administrators tend to be saying.
If you want to get nerdier and read more about the research methods, that's on
PDF pages five and six, I definitely recommend checking it out.
All right. So Section five, this is starting on page six.
So this is all about the findings.
So it's broken down into some different sections.
So one of them is findings in relation to the CSS equity guide in particular,
the administrators really appreciated the fact that this guide existed
as it helped answer a lot of their questions.
Here's a quote from page six quote The key aspects that administrators
identified at as valuable included a a clear focus on equity
that identifies why equity matters and what it entails be accessibility
to a range of audiences
and see the importance of pairing the guide
with learning opportunities and ongoing professional discussions, end quote.
John The first little point there.
So focusing on equity, so they appreciated that.
In particular, they were happy to see that there was a definition for, well,
what does equity mean initially that however,
some of the administrators were saying, okay, well, this is great.
You need to provide more of a discussion that kind of unpacks
some of the inequalities that are going on.
So, for example, how should resources be allocated?
Should it be Everybody gets the same amount
or should underserved
and underrepresented communities receive more money or more resources?
So administrators were encouraging them
to include these kind of discussions in the guide itself.
So the researchers went back and revised the guide to include more discussions
based off of the feedback that they received,
which is an awesome practice.
The next area on accessibility to a range of audience, what
some of the administrators indicated they really appreciated was like,
Hey, this is useful because it provides suggestions for elementary and secondary,
but it also provides suggestions for like rural or smaller districts
compared to like a suburban or urban larger district.
So the suggestions and discussions within this guide are not limited
to a specific audience.
And then the last main area
that they really appreciated was they appreciated
the fact that there was opportunities for ongoing discussions.
So it didn't just end with the workshop,
but they had the opportunity to collaborate both within
and after the workshop in particular with like CSR organizations
or educators, because not all the admin understand computer science
or have a background in it.
So it's helpful for them to be able to ask questions as follow ups down the road
because they might start implementing something.
Oh wait a minute, I don't remember what they recommended there.
Let me call up my friend Sally.
She can help me.
Here's a quote from page eight that's important to consider.
Quote, importantly, education leaders outside of see us need to see the value of
education and have opportunities to learn about the benefits and obstacles
so that they can help prioritize equity focused planning and implementation
as such, offering this year's equity guide alone is not enough,
and parallel efforts should create space for administrators to also work with one
another and learn from more experienced district leaders, end quote.
That's an important thing to consider.
So it's not just about Hey, admin, here is a guide.
There you go. See you later. Need to provide more support.
Mean to further the dialog more than just providing the guide itself.
So if you are going to give the guide
to administrator, continue with a conversation after the fact.
What questions do you have after reading it a month later?
Hey, what questions do you have about some of the things
that you've tried that I can help you with, etc.?
All right.
So the next main finding on this particular paper is about administrators.
Workshops are
some of the key features that helped support their leadership capacity.
So one of the main sections on here is on understanding equity.
The next one is on using real data and real experiences.
And then the last one is on networking.
So all of the participants for this particular workshop
felt like this increased their understanding of what equity means
in the context of CSR education.
However, the administrators indicated that they still want more support.
Here's a quote from page nine quote In the spring 2020 follow up survey,
that they have the resources and support
needed to pursue CSR education efforts equitably in their organizations.
One participant recommended that workshop conversations about equity
should go deeper by providing more actionable steps
about breaking down equity barriers beyond just identifying them.
That's a really important point.
So one of the things that popped in my brain
when I was reading this was, This is great.
I love the fact that they're having these workshops,
but a one day workshop is not enough.
You could get several degrees in just one
aspect of this, like degrees on gender studies
in relation to equity or degrees on race studies in relation to equity.
These are entire degrees PhDs that you can get that dive into that.
So one day workshop might get your toes wet,
but there's still going to be so much more to unpack and learn.
So if this workshop were treated like a heuristic, it could be
a conversation starter and provide some resources to dive deeper.
But if a workshop is treated
as the end all, be all of equity, then that would be problematic.
I'm not saying these authors did that.
I imagine it is more of like a heuristic, like,
Hey, let's start the conversation, but it's not going to end here.
So it's nice to see that administrators agree that, okay,
I learned, but I still have more to learn about equity.
The next thing that administrators really
appreciated was using real data and real experiences.
So this is really important if you are communicating with administrators
about what CSR education and CSR education equity actually looks like
in your classroom or school or district, it seems like at least
with these respondents, they were really appreciative of hearing
from other administrators and hearing Here's what worked and here's
what did not work for me as a fellow administrator.
So if there are ways that you can connect to your admin to other admin,
then that would likely be very beneficial for them.
Speaking of the last one on networking, the participants
really appreciated having that ability to chat with other administrators,
but also to chat with others who are in CSR education organizations or positions.
So for example, in my former district that I worked in,
the superintendent would frequently have other administrators
like principals or superintendents or classroom teachers come into my classroom
to see what it look like.
So it's K-8 coding classes and these other administrators
were interested in starting to do CSR or coding in their school.
And so my superintendent was like, Hey, come check out our classes.
And this was a good way to engage in conversation
for them to actually see, Oh, what does this look like or Hey,
our district has this unique need, what do we recommend for this?
So that networking was extremely invaluable for them
and actually getting started with CSR education in their districts.
All right, then on page 11 is the discussion.
So in the discussion there are some sections on building
equity, leadership and vision for computer science education.
There's another section on putting equity vision into practice
and a section on scaling and sustaining leadership for equity in six.
Now, I'm not going to unpack those because I want to lead this as a teaser.
At the moment, at least this article is available
for free and again, I highly recommend you actually read through it.
So I want to make sure that I leave enough of a teaser in this particular episode
to encourage you to go and take a look at this
and take a look at this See US Equity Guide, which is linked in the show notes.
However, I like to end these unpacking scholarship episodes by talking about
some of my lingering questions or thoughts.
So one of the ones that I have is how would the findings have differed
if this study was done with administrators in other states?
So, for example,
this was all in California, but how would this compare with Minnesota
or administrators in Texas or Michigan or Florida, etc.?
What about outside of the United States?
What do administrators in Europe or Africa or Asia think or Antarctica?
You know, if anyone's there?
Well, I really think that everybody should read this particular study.
And to see US equity guide, it was developed
specifically for California administrators.
So one of the things that we need to consider
is, well, how would this differ if this were in a different location?
So while
the recommendations might be useful, might be applicable outside of California,
we should also do studies that try and replicate this to better understand.
Well, what do administrators
on other parts of the country or the world think about the equity guide?
That way it can continue to be refined and improved.
So the last question that I have I'm going to give a little preface for.
So I hope by now, if you've listened to some of the podcast
or seen some of my presentations or publications, I hope that you
understand that I definitely value and agree with equity work.
Like, for example,
see the most recent publication that came out on trans culture with Capital T,
So it was written for educators on how to work with trans students,
and it was written by myself and three others who also identify
within the trans community with a capital T.
Now, the question that I have is in a previous unpacking scholarship
episode that I did, there was this nationwide survey
by the Pew Center, and they found that 39% of CIS educators
don't think we need to discuss equity in computer science classes.
So my question is, do that.
who don't think we should discuss equity
or inclusion feel that way because equity discussions come across
as a form of colonization instead of a dialog a la Paolo Ferri
Now, if you're unfamiliar with what I mean by dialog specifically
from a fairing and lens,
check out the unpacking scholarship episodes that I did on that book.
I think it was chapter three and four in particular that talk about dialog.
But an example that I might give is I've been a vegan for well over a decade now
and have heard many other vegans have some very strong arguments around
why veganism is beneficial for personal health,
why we should consider it in relation to animal rights and lately,
like why this is important in relation to climate change.
Now these well-intentioned vegans
are often doing this to try and convince others about the benefits of it
because they themselves have seen many benefits
and maybe one of those three categories or a different one.
I didn't mention.
However, the way it comes across is it annoys people
and not only does it annoy some people, but it's literally an attack on others.
So like if you think of some of the vegans from a couple of decades ago,
like people like PETA, they would often literally throw blood on people.
That is a physical attack on another individual.
They don't know why they're having blood thrown all over them.
They might have actually listened to and agreed with this person
who is a vegan or from PETA or whatever, But because they physically
assaulted them, they're likely not going to listen because the approach
that they used was highly inappropriate and it was very confrontational
and did not initiate or continue some kind of a dialog.
It was literally just an attack.
So some of my vegan friends who will look at another person and do the whole,
Oh, you're going to eat that, did you know?
And then go off on a rant about veganism that
although not literally throwing blood on somebody that still can come across
as an attack on somebody because of how that conversation is initiated.
If we want to get like
more technical with it, it might come across as a form of colonization.
It could be a theological colonization, a colonizing, the values,
it could be ontological colonization, colonizing the ways of being.
Now, let me tie this back into the point of this particular paper.
So this paper is really focused on equity and in particular their focus
on equity in relation to race, gender and socioeconomic status.
Those are the three primary things mentioned within here.
Now, I want to be clear that my choice to be a vegan is very different
than somebody's ethnicity, race, gender, socioeconomic status, etc.
That's not a choice.
However, what I'm trying to say is that there are in my opinion,
possibly some parallels with how
the way we discuss equity and inclusion comes across as that annoying
vegan trying to convince you why you should do things their way.
So what I'm thinking out loud is maybe it's not what we're striving for.
That's the problem, but it's how we are doing it.
And I say this because I intentionally go and seek out
discussions or media from people that I disagree with.
So even though I'm an independent,
Eileen, much heavily more towards liberal politics
rather than conservative politics, so I intentionally seek out
conservative viewpoints.
And while I don't think that the vast majority of people
in the United States disagree with the conversations around
equity or inclusion, I think the way that it's presented
can come across as colonization, whether it's through canceling
or just Twitter bombing somebody or whatever.
And to be explicit, yes, of course, there are racists in America
and there are transphobic, homophobic, etc.,
all types of phobias and isms going on in America.
And they are highly problematic and we need to stop that.
But that being said, what perplexes me is why it's such a high percentage
that 39% of US educators don't think we need to discuss equity.
And I don't think it's just because
even though there most certainly are
racist computer science educators not trying to diminish that fact.
But this is just me thinking out loud. I don't actually know.
I don't have any data to support this,
but it's something that I've been intentionally
engaging in conversations with other people
who explore this work to try and figure out, well,
why is it that 39% of us educators don't think we need to talk about equity?
And this is just my latest thought on that.
Maybe it's the way that we are discussing it.
So how you engage with a conversation with administrators
on the importance of equity might have a huge impact on whether
they are going to listen to you or not, but that's just a guess.
So as a more explicit example, I previously did that unpacking
scholarship episode talking about the Kapor Center's
culturally responsive sustaining framework.
And what I don't know is if that first practice,
the one that's gotten the most attention from people,
the one that is phrased as, quote, the role of racism and white supremacy
and its manifestation in computer science education is understood and acknowledged.
Anti-Racist practices and the centering of whiteness are enacted
within computer science courses and classrooms and quote page seven.
If the reason why is because for some people, maybe that
maybe it's coming across as colonization.
Maybe it's the equivalent of somebody throwing blood
on somebody wearing a fur coat, at least in that recipient's eyes.
Not in my own. Just to be clear, that's not how I feel.
But that 39% of people, maybe some of them fall
within that category, maybe they agree if the wording was different.
But because of how it's phrased, maybe it comes across as too political.
And while I agree
that any kind of educational act or pedagogy can be inherently political.
Yes. John Stapleton, I'm thinking of you right now in conversations we've had,
I do still wonder if there are ways to engage in a fair dialog
that continues or starts the conversation rather than shuts people down.
But I don't know and I don't know how to do that super well yet.
I'm working on it.
So for example,
although I agree with the idea of centering whiteness,
what I don't know is if some people who aren't as up to date
or engaged with discourse around equity and inclusion,
if they see the words decent, bring whiteness
and it comes across as an attack on their race.
Having spoken to other educators, I do think for some of them
it does come across that way.
For myself as a white individual, it doesn't.
I understand what the point is and I agree with it.
But if it was instead of phrased as descending whiteness, if it was instead
phrased differently,
like about broadening participation or diverse representation, etc.,
maybe it would come across differently to people who are less engaged
in this equity discourse.
But again, these are just my own thoughts.
I honestly don't know.
I would love to see a follow up study on that 39%
to really dive deep into, well, why is it that you feel this way?
Why don't you think we should discuss equity and science education?
Because it's important. But for them, maybe it's an attack.
If you think I'm way off base on this, please let me know.
There's a contact me button on my website.
I would love to have you on the podcast to tell me why this is a simplistic view.
And again,
I'm intentionally
leaving out a lot of things that I've already said on other podcasts.
So check out the Pedagogy of the Oppressed episodes.
Check out some of the interviews that I've done with
some people who have spent a majority of their career exploring this.
Like Joyce McCall, Nikki Washington.
Those are some great episodes that really dive deep
specifically into some of the issues around race and equity.
And if after you've listened to those, you still think I'm way off
base or you're like, Hey, Gerard, you're not considering A, B or C?
Yeah, let me know.
I want to talk about this.
I'd be happy to record an episode in the future and say, Hey,
remember that episode that I did on this preparing school leaders?
At the end?
I talked about some of my lingering thoughts.
Well, I've changed my mind.
I've learned something and here it is, whatever that is.
So as an example of that, I recorded this earlier in the week,
had a great conversation with some colleagues, Karen and Zora,
and that informed what I was thinking on this
and I was like, Oh, I should really elaborate on that particular topic.
Or That was an excellent point and I want to make sure
that I include that perspective in this particular episode.
So you may have heard some changes in my voice
because this is being recorded on a different day.
Anyways, that was a little bit of a ramble.
I hope it's also a start of a conversation either with you and I or with you
and somebody else, you know.
But I also hope that you take the time
to read this particular publication and check out the CC Equity Guide.
I'll include links to those in the show notes
which you can find at Jared O'Leary dot com.
Stay tuned next week for another episode.
And until then, I hope you're all staying safe and are having a wonderful week.
Article
Flapan, J., Ryoo, J. J., Hadad, R., & Knudson, J. (2021). Preparing School Leaders to Advance Equity in Computer Science Education. Journal of Computer Science Integration, 4, 1–15.
Abstract
“Background and Context: Most large-scale statewide initiatives of the Computer Science for All (CS for All) movement have focused on the classroom level. Critical questions remain about building school and district leadership capacity to support teachers while implementing equitable computer science education that is scalable and sustainable.
Objective: This statewide research-practice partnership, involving university researchers and school leaders from 14 local education agencies (LEA) from district and county offices, addresses the following research question: What do administrators identify as most helpful for understanding issues related to equitable computer science implementation when engaging with a guide and workshop we collaboratively developed to help leadership in such efforts?
Method: Participant surveys, interviews, and workshop observations were analyzed to understand best practices for professional development supporting educational leaders.
Findings: Administrators value computer science professional development resources that: (a) have a clear focus on “equity;” (b) engage with data and examples that deepen understandings of equity; (c) provide networking opportunities; (d) have explicit workshop purpose and activities; and (e) support deeper discussions of computer science implementation challenges through pairing a workshop and a guide.
Implications: Utilizing Ishimaru and Galloway’s (2014) framework for equitable leadership practices, this study offers an actionable construct for equitable implementation of computer science including (a) how to build equity leadership and vision; (b) how to enact that vision; and (c) how to scale and sustain that vision. While this construct applies to equitable leadership practices more broadly across all disciplines, we found its application particularly useful when explicitly focused on equity leadership practices in computer science.”
Author Keywords
Equity, administration, leadership, computer science education
My One Sentence Summary
This paper discusses findings from workshops on preparing school leaders to advance equity in computer science education.
Some Of My Lingering Questions/Thoughts
How would the findings have differed if this study was done with administrators in other states?
Do the 39% of CS educators who don’t think we should discuss equity/inclusion feel that way because equity discussions come across as a form of colonization instead of dialogue à la Freire?
Resources/Links Relevant to This Episode
Podcasts relevant to this particular episode
CS Educator as Dungeon Master with Jon Stapleton
In this interview with Jon Stapleton, we discuss metaphors for education and facilitating, the importance of community and navigating inappropriate content online, how programming languages and platforms influence learning, theories and philosophies that inform Jon’s practice, critical code studies, and much more.
Culturally Responsive School Leadership: A Synthesis of Literature
In this episode I unpack Khalifa, Gooden, and Davis’ (2016) publication titled “Culturally responsive school leadership: A synthesis of the literature,” which summarizes and synthesizes literature on culturally responsive school leadership as it relates to principals in urban schools.
Culturally Responsive-sustaining Computer Science Education: A Framework
In this episode I unpack the Kapor Center’s (2021) publication titled “Culturally responsive-sustaining computer science education: A framework,” which describes multiple courses of action for six core components of culturally responsive-sustaining CS education.
Making Meaningful Connections with Jean Ryoo
In this interview with Jean Ryoo, we discuss equity as an evolving idea, what an ideal CS class looks like, collaborating and learning through research-practitioner partnerships (RPPs), the importance of examining our own biases, the importance of community, working through burnout/depression/anxiety, helping students through depression and suicidal ideation, the problems with whitewashing in education, and so much more.
Nicki Washington is Unapologetically Dope
In this interview with Nicki Washington, we discuss the importance of cultural competency, expanding beyond “diversity” by focusing on creating inclusive and equitable environments, learning from people and scholarship outside of the field, lessons learned working with CS educators across the country, lessons learned while teaching during a pandemic, focusing on the humanity in computer science education, and much more. If you haven’t listened to it yet, check out the unpacking scholarship episode that unpacks one of Nicki’s papers.
Pedagogy of the Oppressed
This episode is the start of a miniseries that unpacks Paulo Freire’s (1970) book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” This particular episode unpacks chapter 1, which discusses how oppressors maintain control over the oppressed. Following unpacking scholarship episodes discuss what this looks like in education and how educators can adopt a “pedagogy of the oppressed” to break cycles of oppression.
This episode is episode two of a miniseries that unpacks Paulo Freire’s (1970) book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” This particular episode unpacks chapter 2, which discusses the “banking” approach to education that assumes students are repositories of information, and then proposes a liberatory approach to education that focuses on posing problems that students and teachers collaboratively solve. If you haven’t listened to the discussion on the first chapter, click here.
This episode is episode three of a miniseries that unpacks Paulo Freire’s (1970) book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” This particular episode unpacks chapter 3, which discusses the importance of dialogue when engaging in liberatory practices. This episode builds off the previous unpacking scholarship episodes on chapter one and chapter two, so make sure you listen to those episodes before jumping in here.
This episode is the final episode of a miniseries that unpacks Paulo Freire’s (1970) book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” This particular episode unpacks chapter 4, which synthesizes the concepts introduced in the previous chapters and discusses the difference between anti-dialogical and dialogical practices in education (and at large). This episode builds off the previous unpacking scholarship episodes on chapter one, chapter two, and chapter three so make sure you listen to those episodes before jumping in here.
The Shire as Metaphor for Systemic Racism with Joyce McCall
In this interview with Joyce McCall, we unpack and problematize some of the issues around race and racism in relation to education. In particular, we discuss the importance of allies not only showing up to support marginalized or oppressed groups, but staying when conversations get uncomfortable; the Shire from the Lord of the Rings as a metaphor for hegemony and systemic racism; as well as a variety of theories such as critical race theory, double consciousness, cultural capital; and much more.
In this episode I unpack Coppola’s (2021) publication titled “What if Freire had Facebook? A critical interrogation of social media woke culture among privileged voices in music education discourse,” which summarizes Paulo Freire’s works and hypothesizes how Freire may have responded to some forms of woke culture.
Find other CS educators and resources by using the #CSK8 hashtag on Twitter
Free CS Resources I Have Created
More Content
