Download
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Introduction PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Introduction

Introduction

79 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Introduction

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Inclusion of Act 31 in PETE Teacher-Training Curriculum: Raising Awareness Regarding American Indian Issues Introduction Five themes emerged from the analysis of data: 1. Factors affecting the teaching of Act 31 • Act 31 was one of 12 topical areas in a 15-week human relations course. • “The human relations course is just this catch-all class where everyone is like, ‘Oh, we’re not doing this now but we want to. Throw it in the human relations course. Have them do it.’” (Instructor Barb) 2. Instructors’ teaching of Act 31 • Instructors attempted to teach for transformative learning regarding values and social justice for American Indian people in Wisconsin. • “I think a lot of students aren’t at a place yet where they can separate this idea of social justice from this idea that you’re telling me what to believe.” (Instructor Barb) 3. Instructors’ thoughts on the teaching of Act 31 • “We need more than checkboxes for this content because I really feel like it’s check, check, check.” (Instructor Leslie) • “I think it’s really a joke that this class can count as covering…even if we do it great, it’s still not OK.” (Instructor Helen) 4. Act 31 and PETE courses • Act 31 was not included in any PETE courses. • Regarding Act 31 being included in a future PETE course, “That’d be an awesome class, not just on Act 31 but on diversity in a phy ed classroom.” (PETE preservice teacher Erynne) 5. PETE preservice teachers and Act 31 • PETE preservice teachers had little retention of Act 31 from the human relations course. • “I don’t think I’ve been prepared to any extent to include it (Act 31) in my teaching.” (PETE preservice teacher Colleen) Findings and Excerpts of Data Conclusions The lack of inclusion of Act 31 in elementary and secondary school curricula negatively impacted the teaching of Act 31 content in the human relations course. Including Act 31 in only the human relations course, the lack of time spent on it, and not including Act 31 in any PETE courses may have reinforced in PETE preservice teachers’ minds that Act 31 was unimportant. The manner in which a university satisfies a state requirement is dependent on the importance individuals in decision-making positions place on that requirement. How one Wisconsin university satisfied the Act 31 requirement marginalized American Indian people in Wisconsin. The wording in the Act 31 statute pertaining to teacher education may actually perpetuate misinformation and a lack of information about treaty rights issues rather than achieve the intended impact of Act 31. Recommendations Administrators at a Wisconsin university need to reevaluate how the Act 31 requirement is addressed in teacher education programs. Instructors need to develop a way to assess preservice teachers’ Act 31 knowledge so they can make appropriate adjustments in their teaching. The PETE program needs to incorporate Act 31 into its courses. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction needs to reconsider the concept of compliance. Members of the Chippewa (now called Ojibwe) tribe in Wisconsin experienced treatment of bias, prejudice, and hostility because they began spear fishing off reservation land in the 1970s. Spear fishing off reservation land had been included in treaties between the Chippewa and United States in 1837 and 1842 (Kappler, 1904). Racism directed toward the Chippewa resulted from misinformation and lack of information about treaty rights issues (American Indian Language and Culture Education Board, 1987). Wisconsin’s 1989—1991 biennial budget included a provision called Act 31, requiring study of the history, culture, and tribal sovereignty of the federally-recognized tribes and bands in Wisconsin by students at the elementary and secondary levels and in teacher education programs (Act 31, 1989). A lack of understanding existed regarding how to include Act 31 in a physical education teacher education (PETE) teacher-training curriculum. PseudonymPositionYears Helen Associate Professor 6 Interim Department Chair Barb Assistant Professor 2 Robert Assistant Professor 3 Leslie Assistant Professor .5 Colleen PETE Preservice Teacher Senior Kerry PETE Preservice Teacher Senior Aaron PETE Preservice Teacher Senior Mike PETE Preservice Teacher Senior Erynne PETE Preservice Teacher Senior Interviews were transcribed, sent to participants for a member check , and coded using line-by-line coding and focused coding (Charmaz, 2000). Interpretive analysis was used to analyze artifacts (Hatch, 2002). Critical pedagogy analysis was used to analyze the five themes (Freire, 1970/1970). Qualitative grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Purposeful sampling to select one Wisconsin university. Participants were four instructors of the “human relations” course and five PETE preservice teachers. Data in the form of artifacts such as syllabi, assignments, and readings were collected from instructors. Face-to-face interviews employing open-ended guiding questions were conducted with instructors and PETE preservice teachers. To identify a theory that explains the processes and experiences a Wisconsin university uses to include Act 31 in PETE teacher-training curriculum to attain transformative learning regarding values and social justice for American Indian people in Wisconsin. Generated from the critical pedagogy analysis of the five themes. Administrators at a Wisconsin university did what was needed to be in compliance with the Act 31 requirement. Administrators at a Wisconsin university placed secondary importance on the quality of Act 31 training provided to PETE preservice teachers and on their preparation as teachers. Participant Characteristics Data Analysis Methods Purpose of Study Compliance Theory 1University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 2Walden University, Minneapolis, Minnesota Dan Timm1, Heather Miller2, Tom Cavanagh2