Set 1: Highlighted Presidential Sessions
Please scroll down to view additional session details:
- A Conversation between Edmund W. Gordon and Friends: Assessment in the Service of Teaching and Learning
- The Promise and Peril of Social Media in a Post-Truth Era
- Interdisciplinary Contributions to Civic Debate and Civic Reasoning: Post-Truth Complexities
- Indigenous Truths in Other People’s Democracies: Education Research in the Contested Spaces of the Pacific
- Learning Sciences, School Reform, and Teacher Preparation: Juxtaposing Knowledge and Methods for Equity and Social Justice
- Leveraging Research-Policy-Practice Networks for Knowledge Co-Construction, Mobilization and Adaptation in a Post-Truth Era
- A Presidential Circle: Sage Up: A Dialogical and Healing Space for Reimagining
Education
1. A Conversation between Edmund W. Gordon and Friends: Assessment in the Service of Teaching and Learning
Assessment for learning is a new, but old approach to Pedagogy in which assessment, teaching and learning are dynamically inter-related such that these three processes are dialectically and reciprocally employed each in the service of the other. Aspects of such an approach can be identified in such traditional strategies as Socratic dialogues and Formative assessment. As with these well-known approaches to the facilitation of learning, we argue that assessment information and processes can be diagnostic of learners’ characteristics and needs. Such processes and the data from them can be used to inform teaching and learning processes. Such data can also support accountability. We have come to believe that the assessment processes, themselves, can be didactic. The processes of assessment, those of teaching and learning, and the information derived from all, can inform teaching and learning interventions as well as the continuing assessment of their impacts. We believe that cultivating deeper understanding and nurturing maturational development are purposes toward which pedagogy and so its assessment should be directed in order:
1. To measure the status of and growth toward developed ability;
2. To analyze and shape teaching and learning processes;
3. To understand these processes of learner becoming and development; and
4. To cultivate intellective competence and the other developed abilities being measured.
We believe that this is a more dynamic and organic conception of pedagogy which allows greater support for the diverse characteristics and needs of learners. In addition, enables greater learning systems’ sensitivity to the Intentionality of Learning persons, thus opening teaching and learning transactions to being shaped by the self-identified appreciations, feelings and self-referential information of learners as active learning persons. In this conceptual frame our approach to assessment, teaching and learning are consistently and transactionally employed in the service of learning persons. These ideas reflect some of the findings of the Gordon Commission on the Future of Assessment. Prominent in the thinking of the Gordon Commission is the notion that in addition to the use of testing to assess the effects of teaching and learning, the science of measurement can and should be used to inform and improve teaching and learning processes.
Session Format: Prime participants will make opening statements 3-5 minutes followed by conversation between the primes, followed by Q and A between audience participants.
Length of Session: 2-hours
Moderator: Ezekiel Dixon Román, University of Pennsylvania
Participants:
Type of Session: Invited Speaker Session
Assessment for learning is a new, but old approach to Pedagogy in which assessment, teaching and learning are dynamically inter-related such that these three processes are dialectically and reciprocally employed each in the service of the other. Aspects of such an approach can be identified in such traditional strategies as Socratic dialogues and Formative assessment. As with these well-known approaches to the facilitation of learning, we argue that assessment information and processes can be diagnostic of learners’ characteristics and needs. Such processes and the data from them can be used to inform teaching and learning processes. Such data can also support accountability. We have come to believe that the assessment processes, themselves, can be didactic. The processes of assessment, those of teaching and learning, and the information derived from all, can inform teaching and learning interventions as well as the continuing assessment of their impacts. We believe that cultivating deeper understanding and nurturing maturational development are purposes toward which pedagogy and so its assessment should be directed in order:
1. To measure the status of and growth toward developed ability;
2. To analyze and shape teaching and learning processes;
3. To understand these processes of learner becoming and development; and
4. To cultivate intellective competence and the other developed abilities being measured.
We believe that this is a more dynamic and organic conception of pedagogy which allows greater support for the diverse characteristics and needs of learners. In addition, enables greater learning systems’ sensitivity to the Intentionality of Learning persons, thus opening teaching and learning transactions to being shaped by the self-identified appreciations, feelings and self-referential information of learners as active learning persons. In this conceptual frame our approach to assessment, teaching and learning are consistently and transactionally employed in the service of learning persons. These ideas reflect some of the findings of the Gordon Commission on the Future of Assessment. Prominent in the thinking of the Gordon Commission is the notion that in addition to the use of testing to assess the effects of teaching and learning, the science of measurement can and should be used to inform and improve teaching and learning processes.
Session Format: Prime participants will make opening statements 3-5 minutes followed by conversation between the primes, followed by Q and A between audience participants.
Length of Session: 2-hours
Moderator: Ezekiel Dixon Román, University of Pennsylvania
Participants:
- Edmund W. Gordon, Gordon Commission/Emeritus at Yale University and Teachers College
- Robert Mislevy, Educational Testing Service
- Linda Darling Hammond, Learning Policy Institute/Stanford University
- James Pellegrino, University of Illinois-Chicago
- John Behrens, Pearson Center for Digital Transformation
- Randolph Bennett, Educational Testing Service
- Joanna Gorin, Educational Testing Service
Type of Session: Invited Speaker Session
2. The Promise and Peril of Social Media in a Post-Truth Era
In many ways, social media can be seen as imperiling democratic life. For example, one scholar described Twitter as a medium that rewards simplicity, impulsivity, and incivility (Ott, 2017). Our nation’s leader frequently exemplifies the post-truth era, through tweets and statements that are disconnected from facts and by criticizing the “fake news” media. Scholars are not often rewarded for engaging in public scholarship, including the use of tools like Twitter. There are many cases of academics, especially scholars of color, being harassed online, and even sometimes “doxxed,” or put in danger by having personal information like their addresses released. Social media often serves as an echo chamber, reinforcing homophily in the viewpoints of different groups and leading to polarization. However, for all the times that Twitter and other social media outlets contribute to a more polarized society, these tools can also serve as a powerful way to connect those from divergent backgrounds and perspectives. Social media connects policy and news organizations with researchers and the public, and its potential as a tool for connection serves as an important counterpoint to its negative effects.
In this panel, we offer an interactive exploration of these issues by featuring panelists who have experienced both the promise and peril of social media—democratic engagement and/or the suppression of democratic ideals—to examine the affordances and constraints of social media. We also include a panelist who uses social media to connect graduate students with information about the hidden curriculum of academia. Finally, this session is organized to be both interactive and an educative opportunity for participants. A table will be set up near the entrance to the room for “Twitter newbies” with volunteers helping session attendees set up Twitter accounts for live-tweeting during the session. For participants who enter late or do not wish to create a Twitter account, we will ask those in the audience who are actively tweeting to raise their hands and partner with someone not tweeting so that everyone in the audience will know how to use this medium by the end of the session.
Session Format: Each panelist will give a short presentation (five minutes), while audience members ask questions via a Twitter backchannel. Each panelist will then respond to audience questions (10 minutes), with the cycle ending with opportunities for small group conversation.
Length of Session: 90-minute Session
Chair: Emily Hodge, Montclair State University
Participants:
Type of Session: Invited Speaker Session
In many ways, social media can be seen as imperiling democratic life. For example, one scholar described Twitter as a medium that rewards simplicity, impulsivity, and incivility (Ott, 2017). Our nation’s leader frequently exemplifies the post-truth era, through tweets and statements that are disconnected from facts and by criticizing the “fake news” media. Scholars are not often rewarded for engaging in public scholarship, including the use of tools like Twitter. There are many cases of academics, especially scholars of color, being harassed online, and even sometimes “doxxed,” or put in danger by having personal information like their addresses released. Social media often serves as an echo chamber, reinforcing homophily in the viewpoints of different groups and leading to polarization. However, for all the times that Twitter and other social media outlets contribute to a more polarized society, these tools can also serve as a powerful way to connect those from divergent backgrounds and perspectives. Social media connects policy and news organizations with researchers and the public, and its potential as a tool for connection serves as an important counterpoint to its negative effects.
In this panel, we offer an interactive exploration of these issues by featuring panelists who have experienced both the promise and peril of social media—democratic engagement and/or the suppression of democratic ideals—to examine the affordances and constraints of social media. We also include a panelist who uses social media to connect graduate students with information about the hidden curriculum of academia. Finally, this session is organized to be both interactive and an educative opportunity for participants. A table will be set up near the entrance to the room for “Twitter newbies” with volunteers helping session attendees set up Twitter accounts for live-tweeting during the session. For participants who enter late or do not wish to create a Twitter account, we will ask those in the audience who are actively tweeting to raise their hands and partner with someone not tweeting so that everyone in the audience will know how to use this medium by the end of the session.
Session Format: Each panelist will give a short presentation (five minutes), while audience members ask questions via a Twitter backchannel. Each panelist will then respond to audience questions (10 minutes), with the cycle ending with opportunities for small group conversation.
Length of Session: 90-minute Session
Chair: Emily Hodge, Montclair State University
Participants:
- Jonathan Supovitz, University of Pennsylvania
- Sonya Douglass Horsford, Teachers College, Columbia University
- Vivian Tseng, William T. Grant Foundation
- Leigh Hall, University of Wyoming
Type of Session: Invited Speaker Session
3. Interdisciplinary Contributions to Civic Debate and Civic Reasoning: Post-Truth Complexities
Among the most important goals of public education is to prepare young people to engage in informed civic action predicated on a disposition to wrestle with the complexities of policy making in a diverse society. The political, economic, and moral dilemmas that are central to accusations of “fake news” actually entail complex issues that often involve competing interests and warrants. As a consequence, weighing alternatives in order to decide a policy question (i.e., deliberation) isn’t only a matter of weighing evidence and judging the credibility of sources. While the belief is widespread that accurate information is the keystone of democratic decision making, accurate information is itself now a contested construct. It is well known that directional motivation or “hot cognition” (Lodge & Taber, 2005) biases information processing, but this is especially the case when that information is about controversial policy issues. Furthermore, with our wildly proliferating media (social, print, cable, etc.), there is ever- increasing opportunity for sincere persons to believe “alternative facts.” The importance of the task requires at least that we understand policy making as an ideologically driven dynamic system with tractable entry points.
This symposium featuring interdisciplinary scholars will engage in dialogue around the underpinnings of civic debate and reasoning and the potential entry points that anticipate its difficulties including how to address challenges of conceptual change (e.g. misunderstandings that people bring to such questions), implicit bias (e.g. stereotype biases), understanding cultural variation (e.g. understanding the ways contexts shape beliefs and dispositions), content knowledge (e.g. political, social and economic systems, history as it impacts current events and issues); knowledge in relevant domains such as science and mathematics involved in warranting claims around such issues as global warming and distributions of impacts of poverty; of literature and the arts as windows into understanding lives of people different from ourselves and the ability to understand cross cutting human dilemmas. Despite efforts to introduce state level policies to increase and enhance opportunities for young people in public education to engage in civic activity, these efforts are not typically informed by the range of extant knowledge about human learning and development that provide a more comprehensive framework for thinking about how to tackle such goals and are often limited to addressing courses in civic education. This symposium brings together scholars working in the following domains who typically are not in dialogue with one another around robust framing of how to address the need to prepare our young people to engage in complex civic reasoning and debate as entry points into civic action: civic education, human development, cognition, content area instruction in science and mathematics, international work in civics education, and policy and practice.
Session Format: Dialogical
Length of Session: 2-hours
Participants:
Discussant: Diana Hess, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Type of Session: Symposium
Among the most important goals of public education is to prepare young people to engage in informed civic action predicated on a disposition to wrestle with the complexities of policy making in a diverse society. The political, economic, and moral dilemmas that are central to accusations of “fake news” actually entail complex issues that often involve competing interests and warrants. As a consequence, weighing alternatives in order to decide a policy question (i.e., deliberation) isn’t only a matter of weighing evidence and judging the credibility of sources. While the belief is widespread that accurate information is the keystone of democratic decision making, accurate information is itself now a contested construct. It is well known that directional motivation or “hot cognition” (Lodge & Taber, 2005) biases information processing, but this is especially the case when that information is about controversial policy issues. Furthermore, with our wildly proliferating media (social, print, cable, etc.), there is ever- increasing opportunity for sincere persons to believe “alternative facts.” The importance of the task requires at least that we understand policy making as an ideologically driven dynamic system with tractable entry points.
This symposium featuring interdisciplinary scholars will engage in dialogue around the underpinnings of civic debate and reasoning and the potential entry points that anticipate its difficulties including how to address challenges of conceptual change (e.g. misunderstandings that people bring to such questions), implicit bias (e.g. stereotype biases), understanding cultural variation (e.g. understanding the ways contexts shape beliefs and dispositions), content knowledge (e.g. political, social and economic systems, history as it impacts current events and issues); knowledge in relevant domains such as science and mathematics involved in warranting claims around such issues as global warming and distributions of impacts of poverty; of literature and the arts as windows into understanding lives of people different from ourselves and the ability to understand cross cutting human dilemmas. Despite efforts to introduce state level policies to increase and enhance opportunities for young people in public education to engage in civic activity, these efforts are not typically informed by the range of extant knowledge about human learning and development that provide a more comprehensive framework for thinking about how to tackle such goals and are often limited to addressing courses in civic education. This symposium brings together scholars working in the following domains who typically are not in dialogue with one another around robust framing of how to address the need to prepare our young people to engage in complex civic reasoning and debate as entry points into civic action: civic education, human development, cognition, content area instruction in science and mathematics, international work in civics education, and policy and practice.
Session Format: Dialogical
Length of Session: 2-hours
Participants:
- Joseph Kahne, University of California-Riverside
- Benjamin Bowyer, University of California-Riverside
- Carol Lee, Northwestern University
- Na'ilah Suad Nasir, Spencer Foundation
- Megan Bang, Spencer Foundation/University of Washington
- Judith Torney-Purta, University of Maryland
- James A. Banks, University of Washington
- Sarah Warshauer Freedman, University of California-Berkeley
Discussant: Diana Hess, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Type of Session: Symposium
4. Indigenous Truths in Other People’s Democracies: Education Research in the Contested Spaces of the Pacific
On one level, the “Dish With One Spoon” is a story about the wampum treaty among the Anishinaabe, Mississaugas, and Haudenosaunee peoples. This unique treaty binds them together in a shared responsibility for ensuring the health and wellbeing of the lands they share. In turn, it is expected that the lands take care of them. But, the story is more than land guardianship and sustainable living. It is about the profound spiritual connection that Indigenous peoples have with our lands and our skies. We spring from the magnificent coupling of our sky father and earth mother—it is from them that our cultures, our spiritualties, our essences, our mana, and our sovereignties have evolved. This is especially true for the Indigenous peoples of the Pacific nations. Prior to colonial contact, Pacific nations peoples enjoyed stewardship of our traditional territories. The arrival of newcomers, however, brought a new world order. At the heart of this new world order lay an oppression that was multifaceted and far-reaching. This oppression involved the stripping away of the fundamental markers of Indigenous identities—sovereignty, ancestral lands, language, and cultural knowledge. As these markers were stripped away, so too were the wellbeing and connectedness of our Indigenous peoples.
In pondering what he refers to as the closely-knit relationship between democracy and colonialism, Gordon (2010) contends that colonialism has served a significant role in creating and sustaining modern democracies and that, more often than not, the production of people for the citizenry has come about through violent forms of exclusion. Gordon asserts that colonialism is a strategy employed by democracies to achieve geopolitical and economic goals is evidenced by the “violent exclusion” of Pacific nations peoples from our traditional lands and resources through confiscation and other shady means. Similarly, the achievement of sociopolitical goals by democracies through colonial muscle is evidenced by the “violent exclusion” of our peoples from our traditional knowledge and practices as a result of our assimilation into the broader culture of the democratic states imposed on us. We are left asking, then, what role has public education played in stripping away the fundamental markers of our identity—sovereignty, ancestral lands, language, and cultural knowledge? What has been the impact of this cultural stripping on our Indigenous psyches? And how are Indigenous education researchers working to address this impact?
Session Format: For the first half of the session, 4-5 photographs will be chosen to illustrate the “post truth existence” that Indigenous peoples have suffered at the hands of “others”, most especially through the colonial invasion of our lands. The facilitators will engage the presenters in conversations about the messages in the photographs as these pertain to specific contexts/experiences. For the second half of the session, presenters will be asked to provide 2-3 photographs/images that best represent their research, particularly focusing on (1) how they have strategized to address the marginalization of the empirical research and knowledge of their field to ensure that it informs the development of professionals and their practice and (2) how they have negotiated the rights of Indigenous peoples to self-determine in all matters, particularly their rights to live their lives according to their own unique ways of knowing and doing.
Length of Session: 2-hours
Chair: Margaret Maaka, University of Hawai’i-Manoa
Participants:
Facilitators:
Type of Session: Invited Speaker Session
On one level, the “Dish With One Spoon” is a story about the wampum treaty among the Anishinaabe, Mississaugas, and Haudenosaunee peoples. This unique treaty binds them together in a shared responsibility for ensuring the health and wellbeing of the lands they share. In turn, it is expected that the lands take care of them. But, the story is more than land guardianship and sustainable living. It is about the profound spiritual connection that Indigenous peoples have with our lands and our skies. We spring from the magnificent coupling of our sky father and earth mother—it is from them that our cultures, our spiritualties, our essences, our mana, and our sovereignties have evolved. This is especially true for the Indigenous peoples of the Pacific nations. Prior to colonial contact, Pacific nations peoples enjoyed stewardship of our traditional territories. The arrival of newcomers, however, brought a new world order. At the heart of this new world order lay an oppression that was multifaceted and far-reaching. This oppression involved the stripping away of the fundamental markers of Indigenous identities—sovereignty, ancestral lands, language, and cultural knowledge. As these markers were stripped away, so too were the wellbeing and connectedness of our Indigenous peoples.
In pondering what he refers to as the closely-knit relationship between democracy and colonialism, Gordon (2010) contends that colonialism has served a significant role in creating and sustaining modern democracies and that, more often than not, the production of people for the citizenry has come about through violent forms of exclusion. Gordon asserts that colonialism is a strategy employed by democracies to achieve geopolitical and economic goals is evidenced by the “violent exclusion” of Pacific nations peoples from our traditional lands and resources through confiscation and other shady means. Similarly, the achievement of sociopolitical goals by democracies through colonial muscle is evidenced by the “violent exclusion” of our peoples from our traditional knowledge and practices as a result of our assimilation into the broader culture of the democratic states imposed on us. We are left asking, then, what role has public education played in stripping away the fundamental markers of our identity—sovereignty, ancestral lands, language, and cultural knowledge? What has been the impact of this cultural stripping on our Indigenous psyches? And how are Indigenous education researchers working to address this impact?
Session Format: For the first half of the session, 4-5 photographs will be chosen to illustrate the “post truth existence” that Indigenous peoples have suffered at the hands of “others”, most especially through the colonial invasion of our lands. The facilitators will engage the presenters in conversations about the messages in the photographs as these pertain to specific contexts/experiences. For the second half of the session, presenters will be asked to provide 2-3 photographs/images that best represent their research, particularly focusing on (1) how they have strategized to address the marginalization of the empirical research and knowledge of their field to ensure that it informs the development of professionals and their practice and (2) how they have negotiated the rights of Indigenous peoples to self-determine in all matters, particularly their rights to live their lives according to their own unique ways of knowing and doing.
Length of Session: 2-hours
Chair: Margaret Maaka, University of Hawai’i-Manoa
Participants:
- Kahele Dukelow, University of Hawai’i-Maui
- Robert Jahnke, Massey University
- Daryle Rigney, Flinders University
- Tanya Samu, University of Auckland
Facilitators:
- Kerry Laiana Wong, University of Hawai’i-Manoa
- Katrina Ann Kapā Oliveira, University of Hawai’i-Manoa
Type of Session: Invited Speaker Session
5. Learning Sciences, School Reform, and Teacher Preparation: Juxtaposing Knowledge and Methods for Equity and Social Justice
Educational policy and practice are often grounded in ideologies, rather than in knowledge about how people learn and develop, and this ideological framing has only strengthened in the current “post-fact” era. Yet, even as the political world has increasingly conflated fact and fantasy, the empirical basis for productive education has been strengthened with recent syntheses of knowledge from the sciences of learning and development (SoLD). As part of our collective effort to ground policy and practice in empirical evidence, rather than political arm wrestling, this symposium:
1. Connects the growing knowledge base from the sciences of learning and development to studies of effective educational practice and the preparation of educators; and
2. Explores the implications of this synthesis for teaching and learning that is focused on “21st century skills,” (such as investigation, critical thinking, and problem solving) and affirmatively equitable and socially just.
Using the increasingly popular idea of “deeper learning” as a fulcrum, a diverse set of researchers will illuminate how a conversation between theories and evidence from developmental, cognitive, and sociocultural research on learning and qualitative, multi-case practice and policy studies can provide the grounding for equitable, “truth-based” (or “evidence-based” in the common parlance) school reform and a parallel reconceptualizing/restructuring of teacher preparation. The “truth” that emerges from this conversation across disciplinary traditions and research methods is one that upends old, but persistent views about the uneven distribution of learning ability across various populations of students and rejects the dominance of “white supremacist” knowledge and ways of knowing in school curriculum. It also undermines the current policy press for teacher-proofing pedagogy, fast-tracking professional preparation, and disregarding powerful evidence on child development in the quest for “data driven” results.
Session Format: This session will take the form of a conversation among the presenting researchers and then between them and those attending the session.
Participants:
Type of Session: Invited Speaker Session
Educational policy and practice are often grounded in ideologies, rather than in knowledge about how people learn and develop, and this ideological framing has only strengthened in the current “post-fact” era. Yet, even as the political world has increasingly conflated fact and fantasy, the empirical basis for productive education has been strengthened with recent syntheses of knowledge from the sciences of learning and development (SoLD). As part of our collective effort to ground policy and practice in empirical evidence, rather than political arm wrestling, this symposium:
1. Connects the growing knowledge base from the sciences of learning and development to studies of effective educational practice and the preparation of educators; and
2. Explores the implications of this synthesis for teaching and learning that is focused on “21st century skills,” (such as investigation, critical thinking, and problem solving) and affirmatively equitable and socially just.
Using the increasingly popular idea of “deeper learning” as a fulcrum, a diverse set of researchers will illuminate how a conversation between theories and evidence from developmental, cognitive, and sociocultural research on learning and qualitative, multi-case practice and policy studies can provide the grounding for equitable, “truth-based” (or “evidence-based” in the common parlance) school reform and a parallel reconceptualizing/restructuring of teacher preparation. The “truth” that emerges from this conversation across disciplinary traditions and research methods is one that upends old, but persistent views about the uneven distribution of learning ability across various populations of students and rejects the dominance of “white supremacist” knowledge and ways of knowing in school curriculum. It also undermines the current policy press for teacher-proofing pedagogy, fast-tracking professional preparation, and disregarding powerful evidence on child development in the quest for “data driven” results.
Session Format: This session will take the form of a conversation among the presenting researchers and then between them and those attending the session.
Participants:
- Kris Gutierrez, University of California-Berkeley
- Carol Lee, Northwestern University
- Jal Mehta, Harvard University
- Sarah Fine, Harvard University
- Linda Darling-Hammond, Learning Policy Institute/Stanford University
- Jeannie Oakes, Learning Policy Institute/University of California-Los Angeles
Type of Session: Invited Speaker Session
6. Leveraging Research-Policy-Practice Networks for Knowledge Co-Construction, Mobilization and Adaptation in a Post-Truth Era
For over a decade, the Ontario Ministry of Education has developed a Research and Evaluation Strategy fostering research collaboration through networking and partnerships between policy makers, practitioners and researchers to address priority education needs. One major initiative has been the establishment of the Knowledge Network for Applied Education Research (KNAER) to mobilize research and knowledge in order to improve educational practices and student outcomes. KNAER has evolved to champion thematic knowledge networks that focus on building connections and collaboration through communities of practice across Ontario.
Four separate Networks have been established:
Session Format: Each main presenter will have five minutes to outline their main approaches to leveraging research-policy-practice networks for knowledge co-construction, mobilization and adaptation in a post-truth era. Audience members will have opportunities to engage with key questions and with the panel. A Twitter feed will also be used to enable online participation with the session. The session will also be accompanied with open access to resources discussed by panel members through the KNAER and related websites.
Length of Session: 90 minutes
Chair: Carol Campbell, University of Toronto
Participants:
Discussant: Cynthia Coburn, Northwestern University
Type of Session: Invited Speaker Session
For over a decade, the Ontario Ministry of Education has developed a Research and Evaluation Strategy fostering research collaboration through networking and partnerships between policy makers, practitioners and researchers to address priority education needs. One major initiative has been the establishment of the Knowledge Network for Applied Education Research (KNAER) to mobilize research and knowledge in order to improve educational practices and student outcomes. KNAER has evolved to champion thematic knowledge networks that focus on building connections and collaboration through communities of practice across Ontario.
Four separate Networks have been established:
- Equity Knowledge Network;
- Indigenous Education Knowledge Network;
- Knowledge Network for Student Well-Being; and
- Mathematics Knowledge Network.
Session Format: Each main presenter will have five minutes to outline their main approaches to leveraging research-policy-practice networks for knowledge co-construction, mobilization and adaptation in a post-truth era. Audience members will have opportunities to engage with key questions and with the panel. A Twitter feed will also be used to enable online participation with the session. The session will also be accompanied with open access to resources discussed by panel members through the KNAER and related websites.
Length of Session: 90 minutes
Chair: Carol Campbell, University of Toronto
Participants:
- Don Buchanan, Hamilton Wentworth District School Board
- Jade Huguenin, Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres
- Ruth Kane, University of Ottawa
- Donna Kotsopoulos, Huron University College
- Katina Pollock, University of Western Ontario
- Erica Van Roosmalen, Ontario Ministry of Education
Discussant: Cynthia Coburn, Northwestern University
Type of Session: Invited Speaker Session
7. A Presidential Circle: Sage Up: A Dialogical and Healing Space for Reimagining Education
What does it mean to truly reimagine education? What does it mean to Reimagine Research? To answer these questions, this AERA Presidential Circle brings together scholars from different disciplinary areas of education to explore multimodal ways (e.g.. through poetry, song, community dialogue, visuals, etc.) for understanding how the research can apply and inform practice.
This Presidential Circle centers on the work of scholars who have designed and developed the Reimagining Education Summer Institute at Teachers College. We argue that this work, which seeks to dismantle a racial hierarchy within the educational system, is the knowledge base for educating students in a racially, ethnically and culturally complex society. This research helps us not only understand what we should do, as scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and leaders in education, but also how we should do it.
Out of this scholarship, the work done within Reimagining Education Summer Institute centers on four themes:
Theme #1: Why Reimagining? Since Brown v. Board, our educational system has been defined by many policies and practices that work against “real integration” in our schools. The knowledge of our field can lead us in a new direction, toward not only meaningful integration but also better teaching and learning for all students. The first step is to tap into our professional knowledge about how children learn and thrive to reimagine what education can be.
Theme #2: Racial and Cultural Literacies: In order to reimagine we must recognize that we are not “colorblind” and strive to develop racial and cultural literacies that enable us to see how race shapes our personal experiences and our professional practice. Our goal should be to teach ourselves and our children to recognize, respond to and counter inequality related to race and certain cultural orientations.
Theme #3: Equity Pedagogy: With racial and cultural literacy as our lens we must embrace teaching strategies and build classroom environments that enable all students to reach their highest potential. The educational benefits of racially/ethnically and culturally diverse schools and classrooms are derived when students attain the knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to function effectively within, and help to sustain a just, humane, and democratic society.
Theme #4: Culturally Sustaining Leadership: Critical to this reimagining process are 21st Century leadership practices that foster racial and cultural literacies and support equity pedagogy across the curriculum. Such leadership – at all levels of the educational system -- values the gifts of each educator and student; it centers the multiple experiences and understandings of racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse learners, including those not measured on standardized tests.
Session Format: In this Presidential Circle, we invite teacher educators, practitioners, researchers, policymakers for an interdisciplinary dialogue with leading scholars in the field of education as they address the themes developed from the Reimagining Education Summer Institute. This Presidential circle aims to engage participants in dialogue about creating ways for re-envisioning education to serve all children. In this session, participants will explore intergenerational and interdisciplinary connections that link scholarship on social justice to promising pedagogies and humanizing research.
The session will include multiple modes of dialogue, and open with a poem by Jamila Lyiscott that will provide a theoretical framework for vision driven justice. Next, participants will discuss four key issues that plague education with a focus on generating solutions, and a collective response to the question “and now what?”. Then, Teachers College faculty, who have been integral to the development of the four themes for Reimagining Education (Ansley Erickson, Felicia Moore Mensah, Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz, Detra Price-Dennis, Laura Smith, Christopher Emdin, Michelle Knight-Manuel, Mariana Souto-Manning, Erica Walker, Sonya Douglass Horsford, Mark Gooden, and Jeff Young), will provide an overview of how the institute has csupported classroom teachers, administrators, and researchers in addressing the 4 key issues.
This Presidential session is designed to create space for AERA members to learn more about interdisciplinary approaches to education research can inform the work that happens in schools; thus, co-creating a way to reimagine education for their scholarship, practice, students, and communities share our collective knowledge in service of addressing pressing issues that plague education.
More specifically, we will begin the session in Concentric 1/2 moon circles with Gloria, Sonia, Vanessa, Django, Angela in the circle. Jamila to perform an opening poem on social driven justice. We will break into smaller circles to engage with Teachers College faculty on the Four Themes of Reimagining Education Summer Institute.
Session Organizers:
Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz, Teachers College (and Chair)
Detra Price-Dennis, Teachers College (and Chair)
Phillip A. Smith, Teachers College (and Chair)
Sandra Overo, Teachers College
Dianne G. Delima, Teachers College
Participants:
Gloria Ladson-Billings, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Jamila Lyiscott, University of Massachusetts-Amherst
Sonia Nieto, University of Massachusetts-Amherst
Django Paris, University of Washington
Vanessa Siddle-Walker, Emory University
Angela Valenzuela, University of Texas-Austin
From Teachers College:
Ansley Erickson
Felicia Moore Mensah
Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz
Detra Price-Dennis
Laura Smith
Christopher Emdin
Michelle Knight-Manuel
Mariana Souto-Manning
Erica Walker
Sonya Douglass Horsford
Mark Anthony Gooden
Jeffrey Young
Session Length: 2 hours
What does it mean to truly reimagine education? What does it mean to Reimagine Research? To answer these questions, this AERA Presidential Circle brings together scholars from different disciplinary areas of education to explore multimodal ways (e.g.. through poetry, song, community dialogue, visuals, etc.) for understanding how the research can apply and inform practice.
This Presidential Circle centers on the work of scholars who have designed and developed the Reimagining Education Summer Institute at Teachers College. We argue that this work, which seeks to dismantle a racial hierarchy within the educational system, is the knowledge base for educating students in a racially, ethnically and culturally complex society. This research helps us not only understand what we should do, as scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and leaders in education, but also how we should do it.
Out of this scholarship, the work done within Reimagining Education Summer Institute centers on four themes:
Theme #1: Why Reimagining? Since Brown v. Board, our educational system has been defined by many policies and practices that work against “real integration” in our schools. The knowledge of our field can lead us in a new direction, toward not only meaningful integration but also better teaching and learning for all students. The first step is to tap into our professional knowledge about how children learn and thrive to reimagine what education can be.
Theme #2: Racial and Cultural Literacies: In order to reimagine we must recognize that we are not “colorblind” and strive to develop racial and cultural literacies that enable us to see how race shapes our personal experiences and our professional practice. Our goal should be to teach ourselves and our children to recognize, respond to and counter inequality related to race and certain cultural orientations.
Theme #3: Equity Pedagogy: With racial and cultural literacy as our lens we must embrace teaching strategies and build classroom environments that enable all students to reach their highest potential. The educational benefits of racially/ethnically and culturally diverse schools and classrooms are derived when students attain the knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to function effectively within, and help to sustain a just, humane, and democratic society.
Theme #4: Culturally Sustaining Leadership: Critical to this reimagining process are 21st Century leadership practices that foster racial and cultural literacies and support equity pedagogy across the curriculum. Such leadership – at all levels of the educational system -- values the gifts of each educator and student; it centers the multiple experiences and understandings of racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse learners, including those not measured on standardized tests.
Session Format: In this Presidential Circle, we invite teacher educators, practitioners, researchers, policymakers for an interdisciplinary dialogue with leading scholars in the field of education as they address the themes developed from the Reimagining Education Summer Institute. This Presidential circle aims to engage participants in dialogue about creating ways for re-envisioning education to serve all children. In this session, participants will explore intergenerational and interdisciplinary connections that link scholarship on social justice to promising pedagogies and humanizing research.
The session will include multiple modes of dialogue, and open with a poem by Jamila Lyiscott that will provide a theoretical framework for vision driven justice. Next, participants will discuss four key issues that plague education with a focus on generating solutions, and a collective response to the question “and now what?”. Then, Teachers College faculty, who have been integral to the development of the four themes for Reimagining Education (Ansley Erickson, Felicia Moore Mensah, Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz, Detra Price-Dennis, Laura Smith, Christopher Emdin, Michelle Knight-Manuel, Mariana Souto-Manning, Erica Walker, Sonya Douglass Horsford, Mark Gooden, and Jeff Young), will provide an overview of how the institute has csupported classroom teachers, administrators, and researchers in addressing the 4 key issues.
This Presidential session is designed to create space for AERA members to learn more about interdisciplinary approaches to education research can inform the work that happens in schools; thus, co-creating a way to reimagine education for their scholarship, practice, students, and communities share our collective knowledge in service of addressing pressing issues that plague education.
More specifically, we will begin the session in Concentric 1/2 moon circles with Gloria, Sonia, Vanessa, Django, Angela in the circle. Jamila to perform an opening poem on social driven justice. We will break into smaller circles to engage with Teachers College faculty on the Four Themes of Reimagining Education Summer Institute.
Session Organizers:
Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz, Teachers College (and Chair)
Detra Price-Dennis, Teachers College (and Chair)
Phillip A. Smith, Teachers College (and Chair)
Sandra Overo, Teachers College
Dianne G. Delima, Teachers College
Participants:
Gloria Ladson-Billings, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Jamila Lyiscott, University of Massachusetts-Amherst
Sonia Nieto, University of Massachusetts-Amherst
Django Paris, University of Washington
Vanessa Siddle-Walker, Emory University
Angela Valenzuela, University of Texas-Austin
From Teachers College:
Ansley Erickson
Felicia Moore Mensah
Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz
Detra Price-Dennis
Laura Smith
Christopher Emdin
Michelle Knight-Manuel
Mariana Souto-Manning
Erica Walker
Sonya Douglass Horsford
Mark Anthony Gooden
Jeffrey Young
Session Length: 2 hours