English and Colonialism

 When I began putting this project into words, I debated whether or not to include decolonial pedagogy, a debate that I discuss on the Decolonial Pedagogy page (and one that other curriculum groups are having, as evidenced by blog posts such as this one). Chang (2020), who himself cites many authors in the debate over decolonization, believes that "curricular reform is part of a larger project of decolonization, but it should not be equated with it" (p. 65). Ultimately, I have chosen to focus on this narrow section of ELA curriculum reform because the role that English language and literature instruction has played in the imperial project is impossible to ignore. 

 In his book on education and imperialism, for example, Willinsky (1998) notes the imperialist push to teach English to "elites" and instill moral discipline and self-control through British literature in the then-colonies. One advocate of the time even went as far as to say that one shelf of British literature was worth all Arabic and Indian literature combined (pp. 96-98). The casting of English language and literature as superior and their use as tools expanded to North America as well. De los Rios et. al. (2019) recount how, upon arrival in North America, enslaved Africans were intentionally separated from those who spoke their language, thus decimating cultures and communities through the compulsory use of English and the forbidding of written literacy (p. 361). Until the 1970s, English-only boarding schools attempted to erase Indigenous languages and cultures, operating with violent punishments to force assimilation to European ideals and customs (p. 361). 

 Curricular change, according to Jewett (2017) would require giving up the way English has been taught for decades, as a course in Euro-American studies (p. 95). While Jewett calls for the use of works written by and about communities of color, de los Rios et. al. (2019) specify that the counternarratives from Indigenous people and people of color must highlight struggles for liberation and self-determination; additionally, these texts should "center and historicize notions of power, racialization, and (anti)colonialism" (p. 346). The authors call attention to the ways that English classes continue to enact harm on linguistically and racially minoritized students whose cultures and language practices are treated as inferior. Willinsky (1998) points to the continuing legacy of colonialism in our references to standard or non-standard English and the labelling of our students as native or non-native speakers, as though only native, standard speakers have the right and ability to use and adapt the full language. The historical context of these present realities is important, and Willinsky claims that educators must think about how students are to understand that English did not reach its global status due to a natural superiority of the language or its speakers.  Instead, an empowering approach can be taken by embracing translanguaging practices (explained in the resources below), centering the narratives of historically marginalized populations (discussed in the Centering the Margin section), and taking critical literacy approaches that encourage and facilitate social action (outlined on the Keeping the Classics and Structure and Design pages).