Please see the link below to “A Radical Care Table Talk” (And Yes it’s a play off the Jada Pinkett-Smith Red table talk minus the the extra stuff)

https://lehmancollege.yuja.com/V/Video?v=3077832&node=10472141&a=1562598314&autoplay=1

Guiding questions: “Care” What does care look like when it is activated? How do we define care? And, how can we address care systemically?

I led a “Radical Care Table Talk” which featured my colleagues at the City University of New York. Alderson Magloire and Lawrence Patterson engaged me in a discussion regarding radical care. In this context, we sought to explore the ways in which care operates in education and systemically. We also discussed how we have seen care activated and the impact it has had on the work that we do. Defining the term “care” was critical to unpacking how we view the work that is done in education which then led to a discussion about the barriers to care. Ultimately, we engaged in a conversation that lends advice to recognizing the importance of care and offers strategies to embedding care in the work that educators and those alike can engage in.

There were so many gems in the Horsford (2021) reading. I agreed wholeheartedly with the assertion that there are “Allies” fighting the good cause but are still dictating the terms and conditions of the fight and what’s best for the people they are fighting for. It’s legit, the most frustrating part of pursuing a higher education degree in urban education. In the higher education space, the purpose is to be transformative but, the indoctrination into situating and historicizing education is based on mediocrity and taught from a linear white lens. The idea of an emancipatory education feels, sounds, and when envisioned, looks good. However, as Horsford (2021) points out, who will lead the charge? The honoring of voices from black people expressing their wants and needs is imperative but somehow, just never gets incorporated. And, when it is, it’s usually by way of a diversity initiative. The title alone “diversity initiative” unintentionally strips the significance away from being a national response, policy response, and/or societal response to being an issue for those and to address those who are considered critical mass. WHY IS THAT?

At times, it feels like the people who are marginalized are also charged with the burden of change. Horsford’s writing on integration is also something I’ve pondered every time data comes out that lends support to the positive impact that having black educators has on students. It must be said that the case for integrating spaces by way of desegregation was not strictly due to a desire to infiltrate majority White spaces. Black people were not fighting for White acceptance, they were fighting for fairness in resources, access, and education equity. At this point, “It’s above me now” and I charge every member of society to carry the burden of making education equitable not just the people that the lack of equity impacts.

This week’s readings reminded me that constant reflection and reframing are integral in interpreting the ways in which I react to and advocate for the rights of black and brown youth. I was reminded of the Black Lives Matter protest that has played an integral role in messaging the frustration that marginalized people in society are feeling. In my unpacking of the BLM movement, I accepted the protest as an absolute right and never interpreted my engagement with and understanding of the protest as acts of civic engagement. Ginswright (2011) discusses the limitations of qualifying what is considered civic engagement. As such conceptualizing what civic engagement “looks like” must be reimagined. Similarly, Cammorata (2011) also discusses the ability for youth to feel empowered once they’ve adopted a social justice perspective which would allow them to conceptualize that there are systemic forces that operate beyond them. 

Additioinally, Duncan-Andrade (2009) also makes a case for understanding that two things can be true at once suggesting that educators can engage in academic pedagogy and social justice simultaneously. Material hope which is a tenant of critical hope can be cultivated if educators reenvision their approach and connect their academic content to the lives of the students (Duncan-Andrade, 2009). While I agreed with some of Duncan-Andrade’s article, there was an undertone of a deficit-based lens that was used to describe and was in relation to “urban youth”. Simply put I could not connect fully with the article. Perhaps it’s something that I am struggling with as well, situating the demographic without appearing deficit-based. I just feel like when we discuss urban youth regardless of us speaking on hope there is this negative connotation to the ways that the lives of urban youth are portrayed. Is it just me?

Yosso (2005) makes the case that “Cultural Wealth” should be acknowledged and respected as a contributing factor within communities that have always been researched as deficit-based. I agree with Yosso’s (2005) assertion that privileging and or centering Whiteness as the standard-bearers of epistemological contributions and “wealth” is problematic. As such Communities of Color should be seen as acknowledged for all that we bring into many spaces that we occupy. Similarly, Rodela and Rodriguez-Mojica (2020) not only acknowledge the brilliance of students but also consider the ability of Latin-X students to be resilient as a cultural strength. The truth is Communities of Color bring so much to all aspects of life from inventors to philosophers, greatness is within our DNA.

In addition to finding the readings interesting, I was also analytical about the words most often seen in articles like these specifically the term “resilIent”. I can’t help but ask if it’s fair for marginalized students to be inadvertently tasked with being resilient? Resiliency is a resource and people of color have no choice but to be resilient if they want to survive the evilness that is racism. But I am conflicted. I am conflicted because being resilient is exhausting. As both readings suggested the cultural wealth of Communities of Color should be acknowledged without Communities of Color being subjected to conformity in order to be respected. However here is my conflict, isn’t being resilient still conforming/accepting the holds of racism? Both readings make the case that the interconnected processes of social equity and education equity are inextricable from each other. The pervasiveness of racism is real and I am happy that the CDC recently recognized Racism as a public health crisis. Just as the articles suggested the deficit should not fall on the backs of Communities of Color.    

Rivera-McCutchin (2020) highlighted the fundamental shift that needs to occur in order for any call to action to be transformative and that is a commitment to social justice and anti-racism. Principal Johnson did not retreat in the face of racial and political injustice instead, he acknowledged the deleterious effects of police brutality on the psyche of black and brown children by planning conferences and organizing walk-outs (Rivera-McCutchen, 2020). Similarly, By Principal Johnson greeting students in the morning and humanizing their existence by asking about their family members and calling students by their names, he built a welcoming environment that took away front the notion that students are “just numbers/statistics” in his school showcasing what is referred to as “Authentic Care” (Rivera-McCutchen, 2020). I was also impressed by Principal Johnson’s relationship with his staff. Creating a work environment that exercises authentic care is equally as important. As the survey indicated, teachers felt cared for, safe, and respected and it is that transference of energy that was cultivated in the weekly community circles (Rivera-McCuthen, 2020). Lastly, it was Principal Johnson’s intolerance and/or disbelief in mediocrity, authentic care, and commitment to social justice that pushed the school to function in optimal capacity so why is this so hard to infuse in our public school system at all levels? Why is it so difficult to infuse frameworks that work in our teacher education and school leadership programs? The reading and the aforementioned questions also have me wondering why questions of radical care are not included in our teacher certification exams?

Recognizing students for their cultural significance and all the contributions that they bring into the classroom not only affirms students but also, makes them part of the democratic process of schooling (Antrop-Gonzalez & Dejesus, 2006). The readings for this week highlighted that affirming students and teaching with authentic care are two factors that are inextricable from student success (Antrop-Gonzalez & Dejesus, 2006; Tichnor-Wagner & Allen, 2016). A point that was well made by Tichnor-Wagner & Allen (2016) is that exercising ethics of care is priceless as such, I question why it is so hard for teachers and school leaders to exercise care? In reading Rolon-Dow (2005) the point of understanding how race and class intersect with how students receive and interpret caring stood out tremendously. Similarly, I am reassured that “caring” cannot be forced onto educators instead, it must be demanded. More specifically, if educators aren’t able to care about the students they serve then they don’t deserve the right to teach. The aforementioned point of demanding caring educators is strong but the damage that has been done by those who don’t care has been worse. Students respond to caring environments provided that it is the right care as such they also respond to being held accountable because of established trust and the belief by their school leaders in their greatness (Curry, 2016; Rivera-McCutchen, 2012).

My final thought for this week has landed on the Community Control movement of 1966. Perhaps we need to disrupt public education and push for community control over our public school system? Can this ever happen? I know it’s happening in fragmented ways but, what if this was the way we “did” public education?

The readings for this week highlighted the contributions of Paulo Freire and his transformative approach to education by centering love, liberation, and humanity in education. The readings resonated deeply with me because at the crux was this idea of being fearless in the pursuit of transformative education. I have always lived by the motto of being fearless. Fearless in the goals that I pursue and living fearlessly as I push for equity in education. “Armed love” is exactly what is needed if we want to see changes in society and the field of education as it activates the love in “armed love” and also the notion of being fearless “the love required in education for liberation and equality cannot be timid” (Rivera McCutchen, 2019, p. 237). The issues within urban education have less to do with the people that are seeking education and more to do with the structural, systemic, and environmental violence that is experienced by Black and Latin-X communities (Miller, Brown, & Hopson, 2011). Similarly, to find solutions and address the issues that plague our education system, we have to look beyond individual circumstances and recognize how interconnected political and economic forces are in perpetuating injustice (Darder, 2002). I agree with Paulo Freire (1998) in his assertion that we must listen to everyone regardless of their intellectual level and we must listen without elitism. However, why do I feel like the people that are heading to this advice are not the people that need to hear this? While encouraged by this week’s readings because I feel like I have tangible approaches that are not only evidence-based but are also in alignment with my educational philosophy, I still have questions. I want to know what our decision-makers are being taught and what qualifies them to be education leaders charged with improving our education system? Because as far as I’m concerned, I don’t see any of the recommendations and/or philosophical approaches incorporated in the work that they do to improve our education system. But, I digress! Maybe it’s the people in this class that is meant to be transformative and for what it’s worth I believe in each and every one of you!

“Caring” specifically in the work that services others should not be an anomaly. The assertion that empathetic caring is distinguishable from normative caring because it evokes emotions that push others to go further in finding a solution is concerning (Bass, 2012). I feel like empathetic caring should be the norm. However, to care and utilize caring as an act of resistance to combat structural racism in education, an investment in the emotional well-being of students of color must exist (Wilson, 2015). So how do we find a solution? The cure to all of the education woes goes beyond exclusively hiring black women educators/leaders. Leaning into black womanist theory and black feminist theory may assist with paying the education debt. Black women educators leaning into their maternal instinct motivates, protects, and essentially provides the tools for survival in an education environment that has traditionally rejected black education from students to scholars (Beauboeuf-Lafontant, 2002). Thus, highlighting Black women and their epistemological contributions can serve as a way to combat the disproportionality we see in education.

The readings for this week have prompted me to ask a radical question “Should black education be left exclusively in the hands of black educators?” And a second tiered question that I had was Are disadvantaged people the only ones in need of “rescuing”? I ask this because I feel like those who are complicit in maintaining a system of racial and/or class hierarchy are in distressing form as well. Imagine if they had to unpack their “stuff” in the ways that bipoc’s have to?!?

The article by Ladson-Billings and Tate was written in 1995 and I am still able to read it as though it was written in 2021. To be honest, I am tired. The argument of race existing as a significant factor in determining inequity in the U.S. remains true (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995). This fact is evidenced in multiple areas of American life, from education to healthcare but I digress. Critical Race Theory has offered to the discourse a lens that can be used to highlight the racialized experiences and inequities in education (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995). In reading Dixson and Anderson (2018) I was reminded of the power of counternarratives. Similarly, I am in full agreement that counternarratives have the ability to combat hegemonic white views that have been reserved as the basis for situating Black people in history and education. However, I also recognize the limitations of focusing solely on counternarratives without using other tenants of Critical Race Theory to unpack the narratives and analyze the insidious nature of how racism operates ( Dixson & Anderson, 2018). Perhaps the reason educators and researchers alike fixate on counternarratives is because so much of the Black story has a. Been told by “other” people and b. The silencing of black people has led to an unquenched desire to be heard and seen as epistemological experts. Thus, is the call to push counternarratives further too much too soon when there is so much more of the story to tell and falsities to combat?