Letting go : a self-study utilizing critical literacy as method in improving my practice /

This is a Self-study about my role as a teacher, driven by the question: "How do I improve my practice?" (Whitehead, 1989)? In this study, I explored the discomfort that I had with the way that I had been teaching. Specifically, I worked to uncover the reasons behind my obsessive (mis)management of my students. I wrote of how I came to give my Self permission for this critique: how I came to know that all knowledge is a construction, and that my practice, too, is a construction. I grounded this journey within my experiences. I constructed these experiences in narrative fomi in order to reach a greater understanding of how I came to be the teacher I initially was. I explored metaphors that impacted my practice, re-constructed them, and saw more clearly the assumptions and influences that have guided my teaching. I centred my inquiry into my teaching within an Action Reflection methodology, bon-owing Jack Whitehead's (1989) term to describe my version of Action Research. I relied upon the embedded cyclical pattern of Action Reflection to understand my teaching Self: beginning from a critical moment, reflecting upon it, and then taking appropriate action, and continuing in this way, working to improve my practice. To understand these critical moments, I developed a personal definition of critical literacy. I then tumed this definition inward. In treating my practice as a textual production, I applied critical literacy as a framework in coming to know and understand the construction that is my teaching. I grounded my thesis journey within my Self, positioning my study within my experiences of being a grade 1 teacher struggling to teach critical literacy. I then repositioned my journey to that of a grade 1 teacher struggling to use critical literacy to improve my practice. This journey, then, is about the transition from critical literacyit as-subject to critical literacy-as-instmctional-method in improving my practice. I joumeyed inwards, using a critical moment to build new understandings, leading me to the next critical moment, and continued in this cyclical way. I worked in this meandering yet deliberate way to reach a new place in my teaching: one that is more inclusive of all the voices in my room. I concluded my journey with a beginning: a beginning of re-visioning my practice. In telling the stories of my journey, of my teaching, of my experiences, I changed into the teacher that I am more comfortable with. I've come to the frightening conclusion that I am the decisive element in the classroom. It's my personal approach that creates the climate. It's my daily mood that makes the weather As a teacher, I possess a tremendous power to make a person's life miserable or joyous. I can be a tool of torture or an instrument of inspiration. I can humiliate or humour, hurt or heal. In all situations, it is my response that decides whether a crisis will be escalated or de-escalated and a person humanized or de-humanized. (Ginott, as cited in Buscaglia, 2002, p. 22)

Subliminal Exposure to Empathy Primes: A New Method to Reduce Intergroup Bias?

An abundant literature has demonstrated the benefits of empathy for intergroup relations (e.g., Batson, Chang, Orr, & Rowland, 2002). In addition, empathy has been identified as the mechanism by which various successful prejudice-reduction procedures impact attitudes and behaviour (e.g., Costello & Hodson, 2010). However, standard explicit techniques used in empathy-prejudice research have a number of potential limitations (e.g., resistance; McGregor, 1993). The present project explored an alternative technique, subliminally priming (i.e., outside of awareness) empathy-relevant terms (Study 1), or empathy itself (Study 2). Study 1 compared the effects of exposure to subliminal empathy-relevant primes (e.g., compassion) versus no priming and priming the opposite of empathy (e.g., indifference) on prejudice (i.e., negative attitudes), discrimination (i.e., resource allocation), and helping behaviour (i.e., willingness to empower, directly assist, or expect group change) towards immigrants. Relative to priming the opposite of empathy, participants exposed to primes of empathy-relevant constructs expressed less prejudice and were more willingness to empower immigrants. In addition, the effects were not moderated by individual differences in prejudice-relevant variables (i.e., Disgust Sensitivity, Intergroup Disgust-Sensitivity, Intergroup Anxiety, Social Dominance Orientation, Right-wing Authoritarianism). Study 2 considered a different target category (i.e., Blacks) and attempted to strengthen the effects found by comparing the impact of subliminal empathy primes (relative to no prime or subliminal primes of empathy paired with Blacks) on explicit prejudice towards marginalized groups and Blacks, willingness to help marginalized groups and Blacks, as well as implicit prejudice towards Blacks. In addition, Study 2 considered potential mechanisms for the predicted effects; specifically, general empathy, affective empathy towards Blacks, cognitive empathy towards Blacks, positive mood, and negative mood. Unfortunately, using subliminal empathy primes “backfired”, such that exposure to subliminal empathy primes (relative to no prime) heightened prejudice towards marginalized groups and Blacks, and led to stronger expectations that marginalized groups and Blacks improve their own situation. However, exposure to subliminal primes pairing empathy with Blacks (relative to subliminal empathy primes alone) resulted in less prejudice towards marginalized groups and more willingness to directly assist Blacks, as expected. Interestingly, exposure to subliminal primes of empathy paired with Blacks (vs. empathy alone) resulted in more pro-White bias on the implicit prejudice measure. Study 2 did not find that the potential mediators measured explained the effects found. Overall, the results of the present project do not provide strong support for the use of subliminal empathy primes for improving intergroup relations. In fact, the results of Study 2 suggest that the use of subliminal empathy primes may even backfire. The implications for intergroup research on empathy and priming procedures generally are discussed.