Editor's Introduction

Editor’s Introduction

Timothy Monreal, University of South Carolina

Ethan Trinh, Georgia State University

I (Tim), like so many others that I have talked to, learned from, and collaborated with, wandered into the field of Social Foundations of Education, and by extension Educational Studies. Although, I considered myself a passionate and hard working, dare I say good, classroom teacher I came to realize success and struggle, inspiration and demoralization, depended on much more than our collective effort within those four walls. The more I read, taught, and worked, the more I started to see how “my” classroom was wrapped with/in a larger context, one that all too often made laughable such juvenile narratives of the “American Dream” and meritocracy. I quickly realized that education was more than my individual classroom practices and tireless efforts to teach for a better, more just, world. There were standards and policies, regulations and assumptions, constraints and expectations. More than another professional development course or a flashy set of iPads, I wondered if “foundational education reforms would be regional transportation, housing, and municipal tax reform” (Anyon, 2014, p. 92). Like Mirandé (1985), I pondered if “schools are created to serve society…[must] society change before schools change?” (p. 105) These questions, among many more, propelled me to rather naively apply to a “unique program, Foundations of Education, [that] focuses on the totality of [educational] issues by providing coursework in social studies and humanities.”1

I (Ethan) come with a different experiences as I encountered the powerful structure of a (educational) system that oppressed my voice and my language. As a Vietnamese, accented immigrant, my language, my accent, my skin are quickly identified as an outsider of the society, and for that reason, I want to find a community of people of color, of those who are willing to support the community to continue my doctoral journey, to continue the fight for social justice, for people like us in the society and in academia. I had the chance to come to last year’s (2018) AESA’s annual meeting and that was the first time in all of the conferences/ meetings that I felt that I was amongst the community of critical scholars (of color). As the theme of the meeting, I write, I speak, I work with a mindset to challenge the social norms, to challenge toxics that the political games are placing on us, marginalized scholars of color.

I (Tim) consider myself lucky to have fallen into this field, Foundations of Education, and cherish the space it provides to interrogate the issues and injustices so many other folks in education shy away from (often claiming objectivity and apolitical neutrality). One need not look further than last year’s (2018) AESA annual meeting theme, dare we build a new (global) social order (Coloma, 2018) to see how a problematization of our inequitable contexts lay front and center to the field. The meeting call asked scholars “to confront the realities within the current context of neoliberalism and cosmopolitanism, white supremacy, hetero-patriarchy, labor and class exploitation, ableism, environmental degradation, religious fundamentalism, nativism and narrow nationalism to explore a radical hope and promise of a sociality and polity underpinned by equity, intersectionality, justice, and love.”

Yet despite the criticality of this call, we (Ethan and Tim) feel that schools (of education) are moving in the opposite direction, toward an ever-increasing valorization of “best practices” and a not-so-subtle nod to proceduralism. How are Foundations programs to exist, create spaces of potential, and counter what I (Tim) call the “hegemony of the practical?” This “hegemony of the practical” references the strengthening grip of a “best practice” teacher education that seeks to ground teaching in objective and scientific convention invoking (and incorporating) reflection, critique, and social justice in name only. We are reminded of Bobbitt’s (2014) idea that a curriculum (or an education program) can be scientifically constructed. Bobbitt (2014) believed in verifiable truth and objectiveness, insisting “an age of science is demanding exactness and articularity” (p. 12). The attempt to make the education of teachers a scientific endeavor leads to “teacher proof” views of curriculum and practice, narrowing the boundaries of teacher potentiality (Popkewitz, 1998). An emphasis on the practical, the measurable, and the safe is counter to the inherently human (and complex) work of teaching. Within such a context, Foundations (and Educational Studies broadly) must shift and move to meet (and disrupt) such threads. Thus, the theme of this first issue of Bridges looks to continue conversations of radical hope in asking why Foundations (now)? Further, in creating a space for emerging thought in the field, Bridges aims to provide lines of flight to the what-is-to-become in the field. The authors in this first issue grapple with the realities of our current moment in ways that both acknowledge the significance of past scholarship while also mapping new pathways that put Foundations to work in (more) public ways.

To this point, we start with Kaitlin Popielarz’s community-centered interrogation of the DeVos agenda. Highlighting the resistance and knowledge of Detroit grassroots organizations, Popielarz elucidates how neoliberal logic works to undermine the purpose and potential of public schooling. Popielarz’s article is also significant in furthering public scholarship as the hyperlinks and references throughout the essay serves as a public syllabus.

Similarly, centering the grassroots work and resistance of South Carolina teachers, Will Estes and Tim Monreal ask if Foundations is missing a moment to connect theory and practice in regard to educator activism. Might a renewed sense of educator energy provide an opportunity to dissolve the disconnect between “what we do and what they do” (Kelly, 2019, p . 2), especially as what teachers are protesting for/against have long been foci of Foundations scholarship (i.e. neoliberal logic, lack of teacher respect/autonomy, racialized school inequities, improved school funding)?

Relatedly, James Rigney and Amanda Pate provide a glimpse into how one school of education is bridging the gap between Foundations and Teacher Education. They argue that the study of schooling benefits when it is paired with issues in teaching and teacher education. In a complementary fashion Teacher Education programs benefit from more critical investigations of teacher “leadership.” In this way, both Foundations and Teacher Education move beyond seeing teaching “as an isolated professional concern, but one that is embedded within the history, politics and social structures of the global society.”

Ahmed Ahmed turns our attention to what it is really like for teachers and students in our school spaces. In thinking through why foundation now? Ahmed reminds us it is (still) rare to hear from teachers working with youth of marginalized faith traditions. Thus, the piece adds reflections of Muslim teacher working with Muslim youth in the time of Trump. This is significant to deepen our conversations beyond ephemeral calls for social justice which are still centered within a white, Christian lens.

Next, Stephanie Bent’s essay titled “Looking Across Borders to Consider Education and Schools” asks us to consider how treating knowledge and discourse from the Global South as legitimate on their own might open up decolonial imaginaries within the United States. By comparing #RhodesMustFall with contemporary movements in the United States, Bent shows how we might learn from educators and scholars in the Global South to imagine truly new futures, rather than fold movements into current power relations.

Furthermore, Carlos Lavin and Lucia Mock aptly describe the academy as fire because “the flames that can bring light and heat can also destroy at will.” Thus, they call us to build refugios, places that affirm and offer safety while preserving the radical possibilities of academic relationships. Perhaps more pressing, they ask us to pause and ask what if Foundations fashioned itself as a refugio?

Last but not least, Ethan Trinh closes this first issue with his piece titled “Building Foundations of Love: Let’s Write Toward Compassion, Connections, Bridging, and Reborness.” His piece looks into the question “What is “foundation”? And “what does this foundation mean to us, graduate students of color and scholars of color”, before answering the theme of the issue “why foundations (now)?” Throughout his piece, Trinh expresses a strong belief that our writing can challenge norms and can connect us so that we can go through the doctoral program together. Trinh’s piece closes beautifully with a quote: “If we talk about “Bridges and Foundations,” let’s talk about sharing burdens and spreading love (among Scholars of Color)!”

In closing, the creation of Bridges and this first issue has been a labor of love. I (Tim) am immensely humbled that others joined this journey to create a supportive space for emerging scholars to play with ideas, learn from peers, develop relationships, practice peer review, and familiarize themselves with academic publishing. In particular, Ethan Trinh stepped up to be an invaluable co-editor whose attention to detail, humor, genuine care, brilliance, and dedication to the journal purpose has made this first issue possible. I also want to thank all the authors who entrusted us with their hard work, ideas, and writing. Their flexibility and openness in embracing a more open and collaborative method of publishing, paired with fantastic manuscripts, made the process run relatively smooth. During the peer-review process, we have had a chance to challenge, to support, and to help polish each other’s work to make this issue critical, loving, and connecting to the readers. We appreciate the openness, criticality, love, and valuable time of each author and reviewer that made this inaugural issue happen. In sum, we hope you see the love and care that we spread out in the first issue. We hope we will continue this fire spirit in each by continuing to support each other’s work and building Bridges. We also feel it is important that this experiment is in the form of a public blog and space, hopefully taking to heart Kelly’s (2019) call for significant public scholarship.

In closing, it is a bit odd to write an “introduction” to an experiment, one that doesn’t quite know where it is going. However, we hope that this issue displays a deep respect for the field, as well as a driving concern to make scholarship more public, more loving, and more impactful. We share a concern for fostering authentic spaces of concern, critically, support, encouragement, growth, justice, and love. We are buoyed by the relational potential for such spaces that this issue evidences, and we are excited for the paths, connections, bridges, and puentes this train crosses.

---

1 This quote is taken from my application to the University of South Carolina’s Social Foundations of Education PhD program (last edited 11/3/13). On a side note, it's almost laughable what I intended to study compared to where I am now. What an amazing journey. If you are a (newish) grad student realize your focus, your frameworks, your thinking will change! It's supposed to!

References

Anyon, J. (2014). Radical possibilities: Public policy, urban education, and a new social movement (2 edition). New York: Routledge.

Bobbitt, F. (2014). Scientific method in curriculum-making. In D. J. Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), The Curriculum Studies Reader (4th edition, pp. 11–18). New York; London: Routledge.

Coloma, R. S. (2018). Dare we build a new global order? Educational Studies, 54(1), 114–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2017.1406856

Kelly, H. (2019). Toward a moratorium on publishing in the field of Educational Studies: Where is this train going? Educational Studies, 55(1), 1–11.

Mirandé, A. (1985). The Chicano Experience: An alternative perspective. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

Popkewitz, T. S. (1998). Struggling for the soul: The politics of schooling and the construction of the teacher. New York: Teachers College Press.