Monochronic Teaching in a Polychronic World

I wrote this article in 2007. Is it still true today?

One day my daughter came home from school and watched me at work.

“Why do you always have so many windows open?” she asked.

She wasn’t talking about the glass ones, although she does complain about those being open too. She was talking about my computer. I was marking an online quiz; I had my marks programme open so I could submit a grade; I was using Wikipedia to research a question the assignment had stimulated; my web mail was open so I could hear that tell-tale “ding” of a new message, and I was in the chatroom providing homework help. From my early days as a teacher librarian, through my time as a stay home mom, I’ve been a multi-tasker, usually with a bunch of projects on the go all at once. Some people call this a “polychronic” personality.

Like personalities, cultures are also considered “polychronic” or “monochronic.” People in polychronic cultures think of time as cyclical. They work in a non-linear way with many things happening all at once. They can change plans at a moment’s notice. Time is subordinate to interpersonal relationships. That’s different from a “monochronic” culture that is time-driven, linear and orderly; where lateness and interruptions are not tolerated, and one task is always completed before the next is begun.

Most of today’s schools and classrooms are monochronic. Students must be on time, hand in their work on a prescribed day, and write their exams on a set date. For classroom teachers, classes begin and end at the same time, supervision begins and ends at the same time and the meetings begin but rarely end at the same time. And of course, attendance and marks and professional growth plans must be submitted according to a school, district or government mandated timeline. But our students are living in an increasingly polychronic world. While class is in session, they may be on MSN or YouTube or MySpace or Nexopia or even E-bay. One hand is on their cellphone, waiting for a text message and the other is on their ipod. (Remember, I said I wrote this in 2007! Nexopia! ha!)

Many teachers are not comfortable in this polychronic culture. If students are connected to the globalizing world via technology, are they connected to the classroom? If the world shines brighter to them through the window of the internet, then does the glow of a lesson appear a little dull? If they aren’t listening to teacher’s voice, whose message is being heard? It’s tempting to ban our students’ access to technology by forbidding laptops or web surfing; to ban cellphones and ipods. It’s tempting to shut our students off from their contact with the larger world. It’s tempting to try to force them to live in our monochronic world.

But a culture is not right or wrong. It’s not good or bad in and of itself. As any Canadian knows, even those who believe in pluralism to their core, when cultures come into contact, both challenges and opportunities arise. When monochronic meets polychronic, we can practice cultural imperialism, with the dominant subjugating the minority or we can promote reasonable accommodation to allow each other to flourish.

As our students walk through life with their virtual windows open, they are connected to each other and to the larger world, regardless of time and space. It’s through those windows that they see and are seen. If we close those windows, are we hiding them from the light of day? What could we see if we opened those windows ourselves?

When love is not enough

Many years ago my mother had a baby, and that baby was me. My mother loved me with her whole heart.

Then she had a miscarriage.

She and my dad were older. They wanted more children but they were afraid they wouldn't have any.

So they applied to adopt. The social worker asked them if they cared what race the baby was. They hadn't even thought about race. "No," they immediately said. "Why would race matter? We will love this child no matter what."

Not long after my mother had her second child, a charming and smart little Okanagan boy who she loved with all her heart.

Then my mom gave birth to their third child, a boy. And she loved him with her whole heart.

Then came my baby sister, from Tsawout First Nation, a girl who was lively and generous of spirit and my mom loved my sister as much as any mother loved a child.

But the town we lived in was racist in ways we white people didn't even see. While one teacher put my brother on an accelerated math programme until she ran out of worksheets, the next told my mom she was letting him-with his reported IQ of 140- run the projector-because he wasn't clever enough to do math. Another claimed my brother had no friends. Yet after school and weekends and holidays our house was full of little boys- boys he played hockey with and went to cub scouts with and wrestled on the Sunday School floor with. He took a stick to the face in a hockey game when he was a teenager and waited for hours in emergency until his white parents showed up. He argued with a teacher who told him he wasn't an Indian. 

My mother raged and ranted. 

My sister's first teacher insisted she was hyperactive and should be sedated. Other teachers had low expectations of her- she was only a native after all. She was bullied and called a squaw. She was told what saints her parents were for adopting an Indian. Many called them her "foster parents".

Again my mother raged in ways that only a mother can rage. How did people not see the brilliance of her children? How did people not recognize their gifts? 

And time went on and things did not go so well for my brother and sister. Still my mother loved them with her whole heart. She loved them when she told them they were adopted. She loved them when she explained their birth mothers loved them but they were young and couldn't care for them and so they had given them, in love, to a home that could provide them with the things they could not. She loved them when she told them they were of indigenous descent and that was something to be proud of. She loved them when each of them told her, in turn, that they were going to meet their birth mothers. She loved them when each of them moved away to live in the communities that were theirs by birth. She loved them when she met their birth mothers. She never feared they would love her less- only that the families they found would not embrace them.

But ...one day she said to me, "Your dad and I love your brother and sister. When we adopted them, we knew we would love them. And we do. We thought love would be enough to make up for any hardships they had in their early days. We thought love would counteract any problems they might face. But now I see, love is not enough." 

My mother knew, despite the deep and abiding love she had for her children, love was not enough.
Love was not enough to battle racism.
Love was not enough to help them deal with the dichotomy of being First Nations kids raised in a white home.
Love was not enough to make up for years of institutionalized discrimination.
No matter how much she loved them, love was not enough to make up for them being taken from their communities.

My sister says "Love was enough, I was able to come home from the racism and know that I belonged and that I was loved because I was ME." But my mom didn't see it that way.

That is why I am passionate about education for reconciliation. For my brother and sister.  For all the kids who were made to feel small because of the colour of their skin. For all those who felt invisible because their history was not acknowledged. For those who were not allowed to tell their own stories without fear of humiliation. For every kid who grew up believing they were worth less than another. And for my mother. For mistakes that cannot be undone. For unintended consequences. For all those who lived with the guilt of doing the wrong thing for the right reason. 

Albertans: You are being lied to

About me: I began teaching in rural Alberta in 1980 . I taught in the NWT for a year before taking several years off to raise my children. I returned to work with Alberta Distance Learning Centre where I have worked for the past 17 years. I am currently the Social Studies Department Head.

Alberta's Social Studies curriculum is being politicized.

The UCP's Jason Kenney and Brian Jean would have Albertans believe that the current curriculum review committee is stacked with NDP activists and ideologues who are dead set on promoting "politically correct" themes in order to brainwash today's youth. They are lying.

A little history.

The current Social Studies curriculum was revised from 2000-2007 under the Progressive Conservative government with Ralph Klein as premier. At that time, I was asked to sit on the K-12 Provincial Advisory Committee for Social Studies. That committee was  primarily composed of employees of Alberta Education, including several Social Studies teachers who were seconded from their teaching positions. Also present on the committee was the President of the Alberta Home and School Association, a First Nations representative, a representative of the Métis, a Francophone representative, a representative of the College of Alberta School Superintendents, three members of the Alberta Teachers Association, two university professors, a representative of the Northwest Territories Department of Education (which at the time followed Alberta curriculum) and me, as a representative of ADLC, Alberta's largest distance education provider. 

There were no public consultations. There was little government interference. There was no expectation that committee members provide their political credentials or personal views in order to sit on the committee.  Alberta Education employees came up with an overarching structure and topics and concepts in each grade level. These were then workshopped by "curriculum circles" in which practicing teachers looked at the scope and sequence of the programme of studies and the outcomes which were broken down into "values and attitudes", "knowledge and understanding" and "skills and processes".  These teachers made suggestions which were then incorporated into the programme of studies.

During the years I sat on this committee, I only remember two incidents. One was when Peter Lougheed, long retired from politics, suggested that Canadian History be taught as a separate discipline. The committee discussed this idea but decided that the interdisciplinary approach to Social Studies education, which has been in place in Alberta for decades, was the most effective approach. The second incident involved the ATA. Some members felt a section of  Social Studies 10-1:Perspectives on Globalization needed revision which necessitated some additional curricular work. I recall no newspaper articles, no outcry from the public, nor any political posturing from the official opposition or any other political party.

Shortly after the new Social Studies curriculum came out, Alberta Education moved forward with intensive public consultations about the direction of the future of public education. "Inspiring Education" -under the leadership of Education Minister Dave Hancock- included surveys and public meetings alongside research. Innovative ideas were discussed such as competency based education, credits for real-world learning, and an end to mandated "hours of instruction"and credit based funding. I- along with hundreds of educators, parents, community members, members of the business community and the post secondary world- took part in these deep and lively conversations that looked at the challenging world in which today's young people find themselves. A world where the simple memorization of facts and formulas is not enough. Where the old "factory model" of education does not meet the needs of our students or today's society. Instead, critical thinking, learning how to learn, creativity and the ability to adapt in the ever-changing workplace are of increasing significance.  The one theme that emerged was that we need to do better in our education system to prepare kids for an uncertain and unknowable future.

Following on the heels of "Inspiring Education" came curriculum redesign and curriculum prototyping where Alberta Education employees completed significant research and built new software to develop systems whereby the entire programme of studies K-12 could be overhauled effectively.

In May of 2015, the NDP was elected in Alberta. Just four weeks later the Truth and Reconciliation Commission released its report and issued a call to action which was endorsed by Canada’s premiers. The Alberta government indicated that future curricula would ensure that all Albertan students would learn about the culture, history, perspectives and contributions of the First Nations, Métis and Inuit.

Alberta Education, largely staffed by the same employees as it was under the PC government, proceeded with the work of curriculum development, following up on the work of "Inspiring Education" and including its promise regarding the TRC. However, instead of just using a handful of employees and community representatives, their new approach was to include a great deal of input. In the fall of 2016, it launched a survey to Albertans. More than 30,000 Albertans responded, the largest survey of its kind in Alberta. School divisions were asked to nominate experienced educators to be a part of "expert working groups" in each core subject area as well as the arts.  

My principal asked if I was willing to let my name stand. I submitted a resume that included my education and experience, including the curriculum development I participated in previously and my current work regarding treaty education and Aboriginal Studies. I was invited to participate and I agreed.  At no point was my ideology discussed. I live in Slave Lake, my principal lives in Calgary and my superintendent lives in Barrhead, I don't believe either of them know what my political beliefs are, nor do they care.

In our Social Studies group of about 60 people, including teachers, professors, historians, and archivists, we began by discussing the core concepts and skills we believe a Social Studies student should acquire over the course of their K-12 education. We were not told

what should be included or what should be left out, although we were tasked with considering how literacy, numeracy, inclusive education and competencies would be reflected in our subject area. 

As our work progressed, we reviewed the results of the initial survey and incorporated the thoughts of Albertans in our work, recognizing some of the shortcomings and gaps in the current programme. We listened to presentations from numerous organizations about the kinds of things they believe Albertans should learn. In smaller groups, we then grouped and sequenced and refined these outcomes which were then provided to Albertans in the form of another survey. 

The curriculum working groups are diverse. Although at my table we have never shared our own political leanings, as evidenced by the heated dialogue, there is a great diversity of views about politics. Our discussions are deep. They are lively. They are passionate. As all conversations about things that matter should be. 

Neither Kenney or Jean attended public high school yet they are of the view that all Social Studies teachers are socialists. They are mistaken. Many Alberta teachers are conservative. My son's high school teacher was a conservative who invited Brian Jean to speak to the school. A few years ago a grade 8 teacher in our town took her grade eight class to attend a rally in support of our provincial PC candidate Pearl Calahasen. In my federal riding, the first candidate to seek the Conservative nomination was a teacher from Peace River.  I've marked diploma exams numerous times and there are many conservatives who teach Social Studies, and some of them sit on the curriculum review committee. 

The curriculum review committee is not part of a socialist agenda to support a particular ideology. Neither the government nor the New Democratic Party has interfered with the development of the curriculum in any way. If Mr. Kenney and Mr. Jean think otherwise, they are at best ignorant or at worst, lying for their own political gain.