Curriculum & Pedagogy Program Committee Report 2012 Co-Chairs: Debra Freedman and Erik Malewski Committee Members



Download 490 Kb.
Page1/6
Date conversion16.05.2016
Size490 Kb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6
Curriculum & Pedagogy

Program Committee Report 2012
Co-Chairs: Debra Freedman and Erik Malewski

Committee Members: Miryam Espinosa-Dulanto, Will Letts, Zahra Murad, Laura Rychly,
With utmost respect, the program committee submits this final report.
Please note, this report must be read in tandem with the CFP and the 2012 Program (located on the program committee page). The current committee believes that these two documents provide a great deal of information concerning our process specific to the priority deadline, CCP designation, guiding questions, town halls, program development and presentation, and organizing time for the mentoring strand.
This year we utilized Google docs to organize proposals. The committee developed a form and included the link on the CFP. Using Google docs definitely helped with the organization process. As all submissions remained in the cloud and were accessible to the committee.
We used the application Dropbox for communications concerning blind-reviews, mentoring, and program development. Giving access in the cloud to all committee members definitely sped up the process without clogging up email in-boxes.
All proposal submissions went through a blind review process. Many thanks to the reviewers and the time they took to offer constructive feedback to presenters.
We received 182 paper proposals; 155 proposals made it onto the final program.

  • There were a number of reasons that proposals did not make it onto the program: 5 proposals were rejected; those choosing the mentoring strand were asked to focus on one paper, only; Hurricane Sandy; illness; personal emergencies; presenters access to funding.

An online program including all presentation abstracts and presenter information was posted on the C&P website.


Issues we had to be aware of throughout our process:


  • Distributing CFP by end of March/first week in April.




  • Encouraging participants to submit proposals in a timely manner. We would attribute this largely to our “priority” deadline (and location). This is the second year we have used a priority deadline. The priority deadline definitely motivates folks to send in proposals. The Program Committee encourages the use of the priority deadline for all future CFPs.




  • Sending out of multiple communications to multiple sources in order to reach as many potential presenters as possible. We strongly encourage similar work for the Program Committee in the future. DIV B is always willing to send information via their list serve. As well, JCT/Bergamo folks will post information on their website. Moreover, Jim Kilbane created an advertisement and bought ad space in various international venues (i.e., Rethinking Schools).




  • Organizing the program to maximize attendance. This year we intentionally structured the program, trying to balance and foreground Conversation Centres with symposium and workshops. When possible, we tried to place Conversation Centres in particular timeslots, except where unavoidable (do to timeslot requests/room needs). We did this to alleviate competition with bigger sessions which often draw bigger crowds. In addition, we worked hard to combine those who requested mentoring with more seasoned conference presenters and we worked hard to place CCP proposals throughout/within all conference sessions.




  • Making program available at least 1-2 month/s before the conference.



Recommendations
There were concerns that were raised concerning noise levels in the ballroom: was it too much commotion or a room alive with a great buzz? We recommend that the 2013 committee consider how to use the rooms differently – perhaps having 1 Conversation Centre in each room and placing 2 Conversation Centres in Ballroom at same time. Note that having 7 presentations going on at one time worked well for attendance at sessions.
It is important that the committee realizes the time commitment involved in putting together the program. Organizing the review process, coordinating the schedule, planning for food, matching presentations into Conversation Centres. Moreover, the Council Chair must be informed at all stages of the process.
The committee should be mindful of placement of graffiti wall and the photo installation. Perhaps consider a more central placement or better advertisement of expectations.

The 2012 Program Committee is available for consultation at any time.


The 13th Annual Curriculum and Pedagogy Conference

November 7-10, 2012

New Orleans, LA

www.curriculumandpedagogy.org

 

Priority Deadline for Proposal Submissions: JUNE 30, 2012          


Proposals received by June 30, 2012 are given priority in terms of placement on the program. Because of the peer review and schedule development processes, proposals received after July 31, 2012 may not be guaranteed a spot.



The Curriculum and Pedagogy Conference is an annual gathering of diverse individuals seeking academic enrichment and professional engagement who are committed to educational reform and social change. The conference opens spaces to advance the ideals of progressive curriculum and democratic leadership in education through dialogue and action. The conference organizers seek to bring together individuals from diverse backgrounds—including academic workers, graduate students, school and district administrators, PreK-12 teachers, and many more cultural and educational workers from community groups and organizations—who hope to analyze, interrogate, and develop theories and practices for educational change and social justice.
The conference fosters an open and affirming environment for democratic community building, collective scholarship, and social action. We gather together to deepen our critical insights into the historical, political, personal, aesthetic, spiritual, social, and cultural contexts of our work. We engage this work within a perspective that regards curriculum studies as integral to the fabric of everyday public life and wholly connected to the daily pedagogical practices of/within/about schools, as well in educational phenomena that exist in anomalous, extra-institutional, and diverse spaces and moments.
As a result of conversations that emerged out of last year's C&P Conference gathering, we are inviting proposals that explore the following questions in an effort to ‘use what has already been thought as a provocation and a call to invention’ (Ellsworth, 2005, p. 165):


  • How do notions of power, privilege, and supremacy enable and/or constrain a liberating praxis of curriculum and pedagogy?

  • What is the field of curriculum and pedagogy about at present, in its historical moments, and/or in its future moments?

  • How do historical and contemporary practices of power, privilege and supremacy interrelate with efforts toward an internationalized and globalized curriculum and pedagogy?

  • What "theoretical mosaics" might help us make sense of contemporary school practices and the educative experiences of students, teachers, and administrators?

  • What are the potentially empowering and subjugating implications of gathering in New Orleans after Katrina?

  • How do power, privilege, and supremacy help organize pedagogies and curricula of disaster ("disaster capitalism" and "shock doctrines")?

  • How do our modes of inquiry, as both scholars and practitioners, work to re/articulate curriculum, pedagogy, and the notion of education itself?

  • How do we design curricula and implement pedagogies that reveal systemic inequities, avoid student and teacher despair, and move toward activism?

  • How do we, as activists, as curriculum workers, teach thoughtfully in an era of standardization and high stakes testing?

  • How does the intersection of university, school, and community (or the collaboration of parents, teachers, students and professors) promote/influence equitable schooling?

Ellsworth, E. (2005). Places of learning: Media, architecture, and pedagogy. New York: Routledge.


Proposal Submission Process-- Submit proposals electronically at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEtOSmlpTEg4am5tZzlCU2hsM1VTeHc6MQ
When submitting your proposal, be prepared with the following information:


  1. Title of proposal

  2. Presenter information

  3. Specify three identifying words/phrases that best qualify your proposal (e.g., curriculum history, public pedagogy, critical theory, privilege, power, supremacy, leadership, cultural studies, popular culture, etc.)

  4. Indicate if you would like your proposal to be considered for the Browning Caucuses’ Colouring Curriculum and Pedagogy (CCP) designation. Proposals considered for this designation:

  • draw from such topics as race and knowledge production, curriculum and the nation, race and the Academy, and/or colonization and schooling.

  • theorize, analyze, dream, problematize, deconstruct, and/or challenge the pervading hetero-patriarchal white supremacy of the field and how it manifests in the field of curriculum studies.

  • engage with critical race, anti-racist, postcolonial, anti-colonial, decolonizing, and/or Indigenous scholarship.

Scholars who identify or work with communities of colour and/or who draw on the activist and intellectual traditions of peoples of colour, third world feminism, Indigenous liberation/sovereignty, civil rights, and anti-colonial movements are particularly encouraged to submit papers. For additional information please contact, Cole Reilly at CReilly@towson.edu or Zahra Murad at zahra_murad@yahoo.ca.

  1. Indicate if you are a new or inexperienced conference presenter interested in being mentored by a more senior C&P member. Mentoring participants share their papers electronically with mentors and other mentees three weeks prior to presenting at the conference. Moreover, mentors and mentees have the opportunity to participate in a variety of mentoring activities throughout the conference. For additional information, please contact kris sloan at kriss@stedwards.edu.

  2. Indicate proposal type (note that the term paper refers to scholarly writing, reflective writing, visual representations and/or multi-media.)

  1. Individual Paper: Individual paper submissions will be grouped together by the program committee (no more than 3 papers in a grouping) to form a more intimate Conversation Centre. Conversation Centres will be the primary venue for individual paper submissions. Conversation Centres will provide for an intense hour of conversations between/with presenters and attendees concerning related and emergent topics. Technology is not provided for Conversation Centre sessions; presenters are welcome to bring their own laptops; wireless internet access is available on site.

  2. Symposium: A symposium is a proposal consisting of 3 or more papers addressing a related topic/idea outlined by proposers. Symposia are an hour in length.

  3. Book Talks: If you have recently published a book and would like to share your work, this venue would be perfect for you. Book Talks are an hour in length.

  4. Workshop/Public Action/Art Exhibition: This year we will have a number of spaces available throughout the program for workshops/public actions/art exhibitions. These types of presentations are intended to foster critical and public dialogue and should be considered spaces for social action and public pedagogy. Presentation time and venue is flexible and dependent on presenter needs with these types of presentations—please be sure to indicate special needs when addressing #6 below.

7. Indicate audio, visual, technology, and/or space/time needs. Please note, technology is not provided for Conversation Centre sessions; Wireless Internet access is available on site.

  • If you are proposing a workshop/public action/art exhibition please indicate the type of space you need (large room, outdoors, street, etc.), technology requests (audio-visual, projectors, etc.), and time needed for this particular session.

  • If you are proposing a symposium, we will have a very limited number of laptops and projectors available for use, please indicate technology requests (audio-visual, projectors, etc.).

  1. 50 word abstract – we will include this brief statement in the online conference program.

9. Provide a description, in no more than 500 words, of the proposed presentation (including content such as purpose, methodology, discussion, and conclusion, when applicable).  In addition, include references/works cited.

10. While we cannot guarantee individual requests for scheduling presentations (especially if proposals are received after June 30, 2012), we will do our best to respond to extenuating scheduling circumstances. If necessary, please indicate any extenuating scheduling circumstances the program committee needs to be aware of.

Please direct any questions about the proposal process to Program Co-Chairs, Erik Malewski or Debra Freedman at CandP2012@gmail.com.
All proposals undergo a blind review.

NOTE: ALL PRESENTERS MUST BE REGISTERED TO HAVE THEIR NAME APPEAR ON THE PROGRAM. IF REGISTRATION IS NOT COMPLETED BY OCTOBER 10, 2012 YOUR NAME WILL NOT BE LISTED ON THE PROGRAM.
Registration Note

eRegistration for the 12th Annual Curriculum and Pedagogy Conference will be available in August of 2012. Go to <www.curriculumandpedagogy.org> for details.



Thank you for your interest and participation.
The 13th Annual

Curriculum and Pedagogy Conference

November 7-10, 2012

New Orleans, LA
The Curriculum and Pedagogy Conference (C&P) is a democratic space where members create and learn from one another in an effort to foster educational reform and social change. As a member of this organization, you are responsible for creating our vision and for keeping this space safe for all.
This year’s conference program represents a range of quality scholarship, critical thought, and public engagement, ones reflected in a multiplicity of theoretical perspectives, provocative inquiries, and unique expressions. We know you will find your time with us fulfilling, challenging, and engaging.
Please take advantage of the opportunities this conference provides by engaging in sessions designated as Colouring Curriculum and Pedagogy (CCP), by contributing in Town Halls, and by dialoguing with colleagues in workshops, conversation centres, book talks, and/or symposia. Whether engaging in conversation or activism, dialoguing with a colleague, or listening to/thinking about new theoretical perspectives, we hope you will leave New Orleans and C&P inspired, rejuvenated, and energized to continue the important work of curriculum and pedagogy.
The volunteers who keep the organization, its publications, and this conference running are dependent on you to make this conference a success. If you have any questions about the conference or the organization, do not hesitate to ask a question of a council member. You will, no doubt, notice the ASK ME buttons on their nametags.
So make the effort to meet new people, take the time to exchange ideas, and be sure to enjoy the cultures of New Orleans!
Thank you for joining us this year!
Sincerely,

Debra Freedman, Program Committee Co-Chair

Erik Malewski, Program Committee Co-Chair

Miryam Espinosa-Dulanto, Program Committee

Laura Rychly, Program Committee

Will Letts, Program Committee

Zahra Murad, Program Committee
Message from the Chair
Welcome to the 13th Annual Curriculum & Pedagogy Conference. I am happy to see many new faces and, as always, to reconnect with those I have met long ago.
It has been an exciting year for C&P. The Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy began its second year of publication with Taylor & Francis and its first year using Scholar One (the editors were real excited about it.). We redesigned our website. We made a three-year commitment to holding the conference in New Orleans to strengthen our ability to connect with the local educational community, which led to Saturday sessions where local educators and conference attendees will have the opportunity to develop connections. We had record numbers register for the conference and that provided a large selection of strong and thoughtful presentations. The Democracy & Education Committee was formed in response to member requests that the council focus on, and develop the Town Hall conversation for, ways we can work against the barriers maintained by systemic power, privilege, and supremacy.

As we have grown and our organization has increased its efforts to foster its mission, our Council members have had to increase their participation. I thank them for their efforts throughout the year and would ask that you do so when you have an opportunity. Thank you to Stephen Carpenter as he rotates off the editorship of the journal, particularly for his guiding us, along with Stephanie Springgay, through the transition to Taylor & Francis. The conference is a huge undertaking and that task predominantly falls on the shoulders of the Chairs of the Program and Site Committees. Deb Freedman has done a spectacular job in shepherding the program development through its record number of proposals and ably assisted by the entire Program Committee; so kudos to all! It was Erik Malewski’s suggestion and footwork that brought us to New Orleans and the efforts of the Site Committee in making the space ours. Keeping tabs on all of the registrations and necessary communication was the registrar, Laura Jewett – thanks Laura! Our mentoring process has grown every year with over 50 requesting a mentor -- much thanks to kris sloan for coordinating mentors and mentored.  In addition I would like to thank Dawn LaFargue and Brian Beabout for their invaluable assistance in helping me make connections to local educators. 


Enjoy the conference!
Jim Kilbane

Chair, 2012


AWARDS
James T. Sears Award

This year, Boni Wozolek, a doctoral student at Kent State University, has received the James T. Sears Award for her paper, “The Nested Nature of M/Othering; Complicating Curriculum Conversations.” Boni wrote a sophisticated excursive path to follow in understanding the problematic tensions of holding the positions of both mother and academic, one that also expressed the powers and shackles of navigating both positions as a woman of color.

Raygine DiAquoi, a doctoral student at Harvard University, received an Honorable Mention for her paper, “’Hopefully They Will See You in a Different Light’: A Critical Race Analysis of Double Consciousness.”

These two insightful pieces appear in Excursions and Recursions Through Power, Privilege and Praxis—the edited collection that emerged from our 12th Annual Conference (if you did not receive this book with your registration, we encourage you to order via IAP—see book table in registration area for more information).


Outstanding Dissertation Award

This award recognizes scholars who have displayed a unique approach and contribution to the field of curriculum and its interdisciplinary sub/connecting fields. This year we have two recipients for the award:


Dr. Diane Watt, for her dissertation entitled, Juxtaposing sonare and videre midst curricular spaces: Negotiating Muslim, female identities in the discursive spaces of schooling and visual media cultures.
Muslims have the starring role in the mass media’s curriculum on otherness, which circulates in between local and global contexts to powerfully constitute subjectivities. This study inquires into what it is like to be a female, Muslim student in Ontario, in this post 9/11 discursive context. Seven young Muslim women share stories of their high schooling experiences and their sense of identity in interviews and focus group sessions. They also respond to images of Muslim females in the print media, offering perspectives on the intersections of visual media discourses with their lived experience. This interdisciplinary project draws from cultural studies, postcolonial feminist theory, and post-reconceptualist curriculum theorizing. Working with auto/ethno/graphy, my own subjectivity is also brought into the study to trouble researcher-as-knower and acknowledge that personal histories are implicated in larger social, cultural, and historical processes. Using bricolage, I compose a hybrid text with multiple layers of meaning by juxtapositing theory, image, and narrative, leaving spaces for the reader’s own biography to become entangled with what is emerging in the text. Issues raised include veiling obsession, Islamophobia, absences in the school curriculum, and mass media as curriculum. Muslim females navigate a complex discursive terrain and their identity negotiations are varied. These include creating Muslim spaces in their schools, wearing hijab to assert their Muslim identity, and downplaying their religious identity at school. I argue for the need to engage students and teacher candidates in complicated conversations on difference via auto/ethno/graphy, pedagogies of tension, and epistemologies of doubt. Educators and researchers might also consider the possibilities of linking visual media literacy with social justice issues.
And, Dr. Laura Rychly, for her dissertation entitled, Beyond the death of the teacher: Reimagining life in classrooms through receptive discourse.
Public school classrooms in the United States are places where teachers and students are failing to recognize themselves as agents capable of acting meaningfully in the world. This research poses three ideas to correct such an effect of schooling. The first, the death of the teacher, is a theoretical framework grounded in Poststructural philosophy and employing the methodology of radical hermeneutics that calls for an end of the traditional construct of teacher that is at work in these classrooms. A metaphorical death of the teacher causes her to experience a reduction, no longer hovering above her students, but realigned alongside them. Beyond their metaphorical deaths, teachers no longer name their students or the world according to outside, externally-defined standards. This makes it possible for teachers to receive their students, and this receiving leads to the second idea, which is receptive praxis. Receptive praxis is a way of being with students that recognizes the unique and unknowable experience-derived perspective through which any individual interprets his or her world. The third idea, receptive discourse, is a specific example of receptive praxis. Receptive discourse draws the idea of linguistic relativity together with Lev Vygotsky’s work on the relationship between thinking and speech to show how the words two people share with each other cannot necessarily be assumed to reveal the same meaning to one another. In classrooms this can mean that teachers and students experience mismatches that reject thinking instead of extending it. Receptive discourse encourages teachers to listen beyond the sounds that they hear when students talk to them and then respond to students’ thinking. Responding to students’ thinking encourages students to persist in their efforts to construct meaning, and this reveals to them their agency. This research study concludes with two suggestions for things teachers can begin to do tomorrow to work toward revealing agency in their classrooms, both their own and their students. Teachers can quiet themselves, and they can listen.
  1   2   3   4   5   6


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page