Decolonizing Competence, part II

Those who can, do. Those who can't, decolonize. Q+A, chat and remarks from the "Decolonizing Rigor in Higher Education" talk, Jan. 31, 2023.

We thank our reader McGoohan for his participation and insider account. For part 1 see here. For what could possibly go wrong, see here.

---

You thought the “Decolonizing rigor in higher ed” talk was wacky? Wait till you see the Q+A and chat comments! Here they are, almost verbatim, anonymized and slightly edited for clarity. Our correspondent tried to be precise in quotes but owing to the pace and audio problems, may have not been able to exercise due rigor. The participants are UMass Boston faculty, and what follows provides a harrowing peek into their minds. The Flickering Beacon’s comments are in italics.

• A presenter asks the audience to define rigor. Some answers include:

  • “dominance,” “control,” “unnecessary stress”, “not fun” (We wonder: Are we here to have fun?), “an exclusionary term (stemming?) from whiteness”. (We Wonder: Does it mean that non-whites are incapable of rigor? Sounds a tad bit racist, doesn’t it? )

  • “Rigor is weaponized to keep students from succeeding” (This piece is titled “Decolonizing competence" for a reason.).

  • “Weed-out Courses marginalize minorities". ‘We want you, but we won’t (don’t?) support you.’ “ (The hard sciences are becoming more and more Asian dominated… Oops, sorry. Asians are no longer a minority, unless they get beaten up.)

  • An e-mail that the organizers received just before this meeting asked: “How dare we critique rigor?”. They respond to this with righteous indignation and say, “We are silenced!” (We wonder: If they are so silenced, how come the announcement went to the entire university community at least twice over?)

  • “We are asking you to think critically” about rigor in classrooms. A participant asks whether critical thinking does not require a certain amount of precision and exactness, i.e. rigor. The response is that it does require precision of language (remember the precision of language. It will come back later in the post. Big time).

• Replicability is a white mainstream idea. It doesn’t treat the individual. (Wait, we thought the individual WAS a white mainstream idea, as opposed to the sacred collective. Tema Okun said so! They cited her in the presentation!).

• After-talk chat: “How do we normalize getting and giving feedback?”. Here are decolonizing examples and non-examples provided by the participants in the chat:

  • “How can we as educators encourage our students to be their full authentic selves while completing all we require of them, BUT at the same time teaching them about the systems that oppose our authenticity? Also, we need to ask ourselves: What am I really grading?”

  • “All assignments, quizzes, tests, papers, and projects in my classes are an unlimited revised and resubmit because I believe that learning lies in that feedback cycle” (The Flickering Beacon salutes those who can fit unlimited feedback cycles into their schedule. Most people also need to eat and sleep every now and then).

  • “How can we grade students without perpetuating the one-sidedness of rigor?” (teaching IS one-sided. Oh, wait. Next comment says…)

  • “I provide a syllabus in the beginning of the semester and let students suggest topics and assignments. Student voice is really important to me and the focus of my course.” (We are fine with it, as long as we are the ones who get paid).

  • “I don’t grade my students. They grade me” (The Flickering Beacon made that one up. The rest are exact quotes).

• The periodic table is mentioned.  It looks like it is being used as an example of something a student might not be able to relate to. This is followed by “How does that (not necessarily the periodic table) construct help me, relate to me?” (We wonder: Why teach the periodic table in Chemistry? Why do we need proper English if we major in English? This used to be our go-to joke. Funny, right? But it must be a joke, right? Right? RIGHT???)

• Wrong! As one participant commented: “The language paper I mentioned earlier: Young, V.A. 2010 "‘should writers use they own English?” (sic) is posted as a pdf online if you google around” (We ask: Why limit ourselves to English? We have so many international students and faculty. Imagine the possibilities if each one taught/wrote in their native language! This was another go-to joke. Funny, right? But it must be a joke, right? Right? RIGHT???).

• Wrong again!!! Some participants said that they allow students to write their essays in their native language and they then translate parts of them! (PARTS?  Not very rigorous. And who are “they” who do the translation? The students or professors?)

The End.

---

GOOD PEOPLE OF MASSACHUSETTS: This is your tax money in action. ¹

1. Coming up next - “Big Picture: How Coloniality Molds Teaching, Scholarship, and Being”, Feb. 16. 2-3:30.