This article explores how we can generate an understanding of the systemic structure of colonization through activities in the classroom.  In particular, the article focuses on creating "a sense of the complexity of colonial oppression" and encouraging, "students to think about actions taken that support oppressive agendas" (Iseke-Barnes 124). These agendas in our education system create "cages of oppression" that normalize a winner-dominated historical perspective. There are many activities presented in the article, so I encourage readers to explore them all. However, my personal favorite involves prompting students to imagine two imaginary societies: one based upon values of hierarchy and separation, and one based upon values of connection and equal value. Then, ask students to discuss with one another: What might be found in each society before and after conquest? It is important to consider not only how the conquered nation may be altered, but also how the conquering nation's values and nationalistic tendencies may be affected. This exercise can then be linked to another by generating an idea web of strategies that a conquering nation may use to oppress a conquered society. These ideas can be linked together and students can predict different tactics that were historically used during the age of imperialism.

Teaching strategies that involve students brainstorming prior to exposing them to explicit historical context are always fascinating to me. By prompting students to begin generating hypotheses about what may have occurred in the past regarding particular circumstances, students will not be limited by their own pre-existing expectations on the topic. These ideas that are generated can then easily be connected to historical context. As far as incorporating this activity in the history classroom, topics regarding imperialism would easily connect. During the fourteenth to even today, societies are shaped and controlled by others, whether directly or indirectly. Conquered nations have their values altered and economies shackled, while conquering nations often generate a sense of racial and national superiority. This pattern can be seen repeating across geography and time. After engaging students in these activities, teachers can bring the class focus to specific instances of colonization and even connect these methods of control to the outcomes that we can see in various nations today.

Patrick Riccards focuses primarily on the Civil War to exemplify American historical bias. Most credit Abraham Lincoln for the abolition of slavery. However, their historical understanding ends here. There is little study regarding Lincoln's values' growth during his time as a politician, and when and why he became fixated upon ending slavery. Little credit is given to abolitionists like Frederick Douglass, who were equally vital in the mission to end slavery. The strategy emphasized in this article is the practice of removing the social restraints on studying American history. As Riccards states, "American history is complex, contradictory, and often quite ugly." History teachers must strive to teach outside of the pacified, whitewashed version of American history and instead emphasize the importance of digging deeper in historical understandings. History is not an epic story of good and evil; it is a lengthy, ever-expanding collection of events that occurred. There is no clear-cut heroes or villains, but a spectrum of characters in a multitude of events. America cannot always be the hero, and teachers must encourage students to explore this idea.

This teaching strategy is not one that can be fixated upon a single lesson, unlike the Pedagogies for Decolonization seen above. Teachers must constantly encourage students to explore topics from different angles and understand how a hero from one perspective is often the villain from another. In order to accomplish this, I would encourage two constant tactics to be used within the classroom. First, incorporate a variety of sources from different positions. To understand World War II, students cannot simply study a record of the military movements. They must also understand the perspectives of front-line soldiers, and how their opinions and experiences differ from the governments that send them to fight. By doing this, we avoid vilifying entire nations in our historical studies. Secondly, teachers must avoid single-committed perspectives. They cannot explicitly state that "Abraham Lincoln ended slavery." Instead, they can display a collection of events and individuals that contributed to the end of slavery.

"How do we make sure that history doesn’t repeat itself if we are not teaching our students the correct history in the first place?”

Wayne Au compares two of his previous high school history teachers to demonstrate the difference between colonized and decolonized history. Mr. Anderson's class forces the students to be "on the outside looking in, and he and the textbooks were the sole authorities. There was no dialogue, only monologue." (Au 249). By not engaging in discussion with the students, a teacher struggles to maintain student interest as well as limits students' sense of purpose within the classroom. Meanwhile, Mr. Davis' classroom "embodied multicultural education; it was grounded in the lives, identities, and histories of students; it provided critical and alternative perspectives on history that we were not getting in our other classes; and it openly addressed the issue of racism" (Au 250). It is this open address of racism that is the focal point of this text. Educators must address complex issues head-on, while maintaining cultural sensitivity. By being vague about complex issues like racism and discrimination, students are forced to encounter these complex ideas outside the safety of the classroom and without the guidance of their instructors.

It is extraordinarily easy to be willfully ignorant of complex societal injustice. Complex issues are, well, complex, and are often continuously evident in our society. Because of these difficulties, many fight against the exposure of students to ideas like racism and the history of "the n-word." However, it is impossible to shelter students from these issues indefinitely. Because they exist in the real world, it is impossible to shelter our youth from the future society that awaits them. Because of this, history teachers must be willing to address complex issues head-on. We can incorporate open discussion regarding racial discrimination and allow students to reflect on how race and class disparity has affected them as individuals. By acknowledging these disparities that exist in the present, it becomes easier to display the sources of these disparities in our past.

Kathleen Absolon is a member of both the indigenous Anishinaabe culture as well as British. In this article, she explores the meaning and intention of decolonizing in that it is, "similar to detoxing and clearing out the colonizing knowledge and practices that we have ingested and adopted from colonial social work education" (Absolon 9). The overarching pedagogy that Absolon focuses is on is not an extreme pursuit of varying perspectives, but simply avoiding falling into the trap of being complacent and blind as they uphold unconsciously imposed "Christianize and civilize" ideologies of colonization (Absolon 11). Educators must avoid being willfully ignorant of racism that purveys modern historical narratives. All historical records are biased, regardless of their source or initial creators' purpose. It is impossible to present knowledge without bias. What Absolon emphasizes, however, is that we must be mindful of this bias and adapt to it. As she states on page 17, "Decolonization internally means a disruption of the very belief system one has come to know.” 

Emphasizing the importance of understanding that all historical accounts are biased is one of the first things I plan to do with my students. All information presented, even that which comes from me as an educator, is full of biased perspective. Omittance of information, phrasing, and emphasis placed on varying events creates bias within the classroom. It is important to recognize and display this bias openly, rather than trying to seem entirely unbiased as an educator. A method to display this idea would be by providing an example. Simply providing details of an event from opposing perspectives can show bias, but simplifying it also works. For instance, the difference between stating that "the car ran into a pole" and "the car smashed into the pole" creates a different narrative in one's mind. Just by switching a single word, we can see how bias can be created in written documentation even when there are attempts to avoid it.