Overview
Since school-knowledge is not the only form of knowledge worth recognizing, this phase reframes traditional notions of expertise in order to understand people as experts in their own experiences. CPAR maintains that people who have not been formally trained through academia have the right to research; therefore, teachers must learn how to bring people together to research in a way that honors multiple forms of knowledge across power differentials. This is hard to do if we do not first reframe traditional notions of expertise and learn to recognize the expertise in our classrooms.
In a school context, where those who have completed the most schooling are at the top of the knowledge hierarchy, it is very challenging to honor forms of expertise that are not legitimated through traditional schooling. When we first began this work, we did not realize the extent to which status-quo power differentials between students and teachers would make it difficult to create a collaborative context. Since students and teachers have not been conditioned to claim lived experience as expertise, we have learned to lay the groundwork for building relationships, sharing responsibility for a positive classroom environment, and honoring the expertise in the room by spending much of the first six weeks conducting activities described in the Youth Development section of this curriculum. As we build a space that acknowledges and honors students’ experiences, we also identify generative themes that can shape the CPAR process.
Many of the following methods tap into the richness of relationship and story as we read, write, tell, and act out our experiences in community. In this phase, we are working to overturn the deeply ingrained habits of schooling that Paulo Freire critiqued as the “banking model” in which students are seen as empty receptacles to be filled by teachers; we are awakening our capacity to understand students as teachers and teachers as students. These methods reframe and recognize expertise in the room, reveal themes for groups to explore, or dig deeper into themes that have already been identified to find personal connections. There is no prescribed sequence to these methods; therefore, they are listed alphabetically. It is up to you to determine which activities work best at which particular moments in your classroom for your particular students. For more information regarding starred methods, refer to the Adaptable Methods section of this curriculum.
In a school context, where those who have completed the most schooling are at the top of the knowledge hierarchy, it is very challenging to honor forms of expertise that are not legitimated through traditional schooling. When we first began this work, we did not realize the extent to which status-quo power differentials between students and teachers would make it difficult to create a collaborative context. Since students and teachers have not been conditioned to claim lived experience as expertise, we have learned to lay the groundwork for building relationships, sharing responsibility for a positive classroom environment, and honoring the expertise in the room by spending much of the first six weeks conducting activities described in the Youth Development section of this curriculum. As we build a space that acknowledges and honors students’ experiences, we also identify generative themes that can shape the CPAR process.
Many of the following methods tap into the richness of relationship and story as we read, write, tell, and act out our experiences in community. In this phase, we are working to overturn the deeply ingrained habits of schooling that Paulo Freire critiqued as the “banking model” in which students are seen as empty receptacles to be filled by teachers; we are awakening our capacity to understand students as teachers and teachers as students. These methods reframe and recognize expertise in the room, reveal themes for groups to explore, or dig deeper into themes that have already been identified to find personal connections. There is no prescribed sequence to these methods; therefore, they are listed alphabetically. It is up to you to determine which activities work best at which particular moments in your classroom for your particular students. For more information regarding starred methods, refer to the Adaptable Methods section of this curriculum.
methods
*Building Trust & Community: Restorative Justice, Restorative Practices, and Beyond
Overall, the methods described in the Youth Development section of this curriculum will help students to value their own expertise and claim their experiences. Trust is key to this process, and we find that having regular community-building restorative circles is a major factor in helping students trust that their lives and experiences matter in our classrooms. See Adaptable Methods: Restorative Practices.
*Dialogue with Text
Using a piece of writing, video, artwork, and/or a performance, we structure dialogue to generate a deeper exploration of a theme and reveal connections between personal and structural factors. See Adaptable Methods: Debate, Discussion, Dialogue.
Ethnographic Interviews
Looking for expertise in the world around us can take the form of oral history interviews. See an example assignment here. This method also gives students an opportunity to learn a research methodology, or it can be used as part of the “data collection and analysis” phase.
Ethnographic Observations/Mapping
Going into the world to observe is a great way for students to uncover the expertise they already have when “reading the world.” We use a two-columned chart like the one linked here to have students pay close attention to their everyday environments. Concept or spatial mapping is another option that involves creating visual representations of spaces or ideas in order to unpack observations and prior knowledge.
Expertise Scavenger Hunt
This is a fun way to unlock the idea that expertise is all around us in forms that we are not often considering. Use our version here, or make your own.
In-Class Mini-Conference
After classes generate a list of possible topics of discussion in response to a given prompt or subtopics under a general topic, the teacher helps students identify a leader assigned to each topic (usually the leader is the student who suggested the topic, but not always). These leaders establish “stations” throughout the room, and the rest of the class choose which discussion to join according to their own interest. After a set time of initial discussion, students are free to move about the room and join other discussions should they so choose.
Guest Storytellers
Bringing in outside guests to speak from their own lived experiences is a great way to prompt students to explore their own connections to a theme or set of themes. We often invite people who will be reading group facilitators or research mentor/collaborators for small groups to introduce themselves to a class or a small group. Here is a suggested sequence:
- Opening Round- Go around the circle for introductions and a short prompt
- 3 Story Rounds- Guest tells prompting story, students write for 5 min, 10 min. of open discussion and sharing from writing; repeat two more times
- Closing Round- Share appreciations
*Story Circles
With this extremely rich way to build and generate the courage to tell personal truths and dig beyond surface understandings together, teachers construct prompts that lead to generative themes. For example: “Tell about a time when someone in a position of power saw you differently than you saw yourself.” See Adaptable Methods: Story Circles.
Literature-Reading, Writing, Sharing
Broadly speaking, reading, writing, and sharing literature is one primary method for generating CPAR themes and reframing expertise. We read novels, short stories, poems, multimedia, visual art, and watch films and conduct writing workshops for students to compose in various genres. It is a common practice in HA classrooms for students to write extended personal narratives. We often use a version of this personal narrative analysis assignment as a way to bridge personal writing and analysis, leading into the “generating a structural analysis” phase. An example of narrative analysis can be found here.
*Performances of Possibility
This method provides opportunities for students to perform or witness performances of what could be as a way to trouble the status quo (see Adaptable Methods: Performances of Possibility). For example, 11th graders in 2018-19 planned and attended the Back to the Future Conference, a multi-generational conference in November at the McKinley Alumni Center designed to develop community and establish shared goals for the students’ eventual CPAR projects. In small, mixed groups of current juniors and McKinley alumni from a variety of graduating classes (dating back to 1962), participants, led by student facilitators, engaged in story circles around the topic of school community and family, diagramed problem trees, and attended presentations about various topics related to the day’s discussions (e.g. Mapping Power in Public Schools, the History of McKinley Senior High School, etc.) Afterwards, students brainstormed research topics and mentors were recruited from those attending the conference. In this example, students both performed possibility through planning and leadership and witnessed possibility through alumni participation.
Personal Story Gallery Walk
In response to a class-generated list of themes (a prompt could be, “What challenges do young people face?”), each person writes a personal story on a large note card. The facilitator stresses confidentiality here; the goal is not to figure out who wrote which story, but to examine patterns revealed in the stories. After posting the cards around the room, provide 10-15 minutes for people to walk around the room and silently read the stories. Close with a reflective dialogue to process emergent patterns.
