The Emotional Ambivalence of Socially Just Teaching: A Case Study of a Novice Urban Schoolteacher

Abstract

The authors contend that studying emotional perspectives can facilitate understanding of the complexities of socially just teaching. They explore the intersection between emotions and socially just teaching via a case study of a White novice teacher at one urban school as she struggles to formulate socially just teaching practices. Drawing from feminist and critical theory, the authors propose the term critical emotional praxis to denote critical praxis informed by emotional resistance to unjust pedagogical systems and practices. The authors’ analysis may assist in the development of socially just teachers: First, emotions and their expression play an important, ongoing role in socially just teaching, and second, emotional negotiation related to socially just teaching can provide deeper understanding of possible change, perhaps even in counterresponse to wider social, political contexts of schools.

Individual and Structural Orientations in Socially Just Teaching: Conceptualization, Implementation, and Collaborative Effort

“…Each must struggle with his or her own emotional responses to questions of injustice and personal bias (Chubbuck & Zembylas, 2008). Teachers who are members of the dominant culture may deal with personal emotional demons (Dlamini, 2002), such as guilt, depression, anxiety, and powerlessness, that frequently are associated with teaching for social justice (Berlak, 2004;Chubbuck, 2008;Chubbuck & Zembylas, 2008). Teachers of color often must personally process a different range of emotions, often including anger, frustration, and discouragement over being marginalized and silenced in school discourse about educational practices with students of color (Delpit, 1995;Lipman, 1997).…”

“…Each must struggle with his or her own emotional responses to questions of injustice and personal bias (Chubbuck & Zembylas, 2008). Teachers who are members of the dominant culture may deal with personal emotional demons (Dlamini, 2002), such as guilt, depression, anxiety, and powerlessness, that frequently are associated with teaching for social justice (Berlak, 2004;Chubbuck, 2008;Chubbuck & Zembylas, 2008).…”

Teacher education for social justice: Mapping identity spaces

“…Further, her motivation for both prioritising classroom democracy and 13 attainment outcomes comes from her belief in the importance of "caring for pupils". This echoes feminist and other accounts of social justice in education that emphasis the interrelationship of teaching for social justice and emotionality (Boylan, 2009) and enacting different classroom relationships (Boylan, 2009;Chubbuck & Zembylas, 2008;Nieto, 2000). In spite of a concern for raising attainment through 'old school' methods, she does not believe that this should lead to pressurising pupils:…”

“…However, he also echoes dominant discourses of ability, asserts a moral value to students who are "good enough"' to deserve access to a freer, more student centred and democratic curriculum, where "they can do whatever they want". His commitment to enact different social relationships and for student voice (Argwal et al, 2010;Boylan, 2009;Chubbuck & Zembylas, 2008;Nieto, 2000) is limited to some students and not all.…”

“…In part, this arises from making a commitment to enacting different social relationships within the classroom and beyond (Boylan, 2009;Chubbuck & Zembylas, 2008;Nieto, 2000) and so informing practice with a concern for student voice and democratic classroom practice (Argawal et al, 2010). Such practices require an 'informed empathy' (Ladson-Billings, 1999) for those who experience injustice as well as the courage to challenge injustice (Nieto, 2000).…”