Reflection on journal article regarding Native American experience of trauma

Reflection by Elizabeth Joy Cox on journal article "The relationship of acculturation to historical loss awareness, institutional betrayal, and the intergenerational transmission of trauma in the American Indian experience"

                                   

Cromer, L. D., Gray, M. E., Vasquez, L., & Freyd, J. J. (2018). 
The relationship of acculturation to historical loss awareness, institutional betrayal, and the intergenerational transmission of trauma in the American Indian experience. 
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(1), 99–114.                                                                                                                                                      Reflection

            In this article, authors Cromer, Gray, Vasquez, and Freyd draw a parallel between the historical and multigenerational trauma experienced by Native Americans and the traumatic effects of the Jewish Holocaust. They posit that discrimination and ethnocide against Native Americans has made them worse off today than descendants of survivors of the Holocaust. The colonial conquest of America stripped Native Americans of their hunting practices, family traditions, and cultural identity and burdened them with debt and dependency (Cromer, Gray, Vasquez, & Freyd, 2018).

            The authors explain the difference between historical trauma and intergenerational trauma. Historical trauma refers to “collective experience of trauma that is perpetrated against members of a group…”. This form of trauma is held within the group collective consciousness. Intergenerational trauma relates to individual experiences of trauma that are transmitted from generation to generation usually occurring within family systems. For Native Americans, intergenerational trauma may be rooted in the history of removal of children from their homes and families as part of the U.S. government enforced reculturation. Atrocities such as the Trail of Tears have resulted in multigenerational trauma (Cromer et al., 2018).

Methodology for this study involved enlistment of a sample group of Native Americans gathered from 19 tribes to assess trauma in various forms. An IRB approval was obtained for the project, and the Native American Student Union (NASU) and Native Elders contributed to the research process. Responses from participants were made anonymous through computerized randomization and other methods. Various scales were utilized in the analysis including the Native American Acculturation Scale (NAAS) (Cromer et al., 2018).  

Cromer et al found that the more an individual identified with Native American traditions and culture, the more aware they were of historical losses. The reverse was also true - the more an individual identified with White culture, the less they felt a sense of historical loss. The authors explored how historical traumas have intergenerational outcomes. They use the term ‘historical loss’ to describe the long-term effects of marginalization and oppression of Native Americans. Negative daily living experiences reinforce thoughts about past physical and emotional losses. Thoughts connected to historical loss have been linked to anger, guilt, substance abuse, and depression that has been evident in Native American populations (Cromer et al., 2018).

            Betrayal trauma theory puts forth that trauma experienced in the context of a close personal relationship is more destructive than other forms of trauma. Violation of trust is a key factor in this type of trauma. Native American children who lived in the boarding school environments forced upon them by U.S. government frequently experienced institutional trauma where betrayal occurred through the system that they depended upon for survival. There were many incidences of abuse and neglect of the Native American children in boarding schools including one mass grave that has been unearthed (Cromer et al., 2018).

            The article proceeds to explain the concept of ‘betrayal blindness’ - a way of coping with trauma by repressing thoughts about the harm that has been suffered. The need to maintain a dependent relationship with an oppressor in order to survive may trigger this coping mechanism. Another way that members of marginalized groups may strive to protect their cultural identities and cope with trauma is by attempting to conceal trauma or avoid disclosure of trauma (Cromer et al., 2018).           

            Enculturation involves learning about and practicing one’s own culture in an ongoing manner. The authors explore how enculturation and revival of traditional Native American cultural practices and rituals are therapeutic and emotionally protective - but they voice concern that enculturation practices may result in a phenomenon where individuals begin to experience historical trauma and a sense of loss. They postulate that historical trauma healing happens through a grieving process. This process of grieving and healing fits into the framework of institutional betrayal theory. In addition to this process, economic, political, and social harm that have decimated Native American communities must be repaired to support collective healing (Cromer et al., 2018).

In my opinion, approaches to trauma-informed teaching and therapy practices should incorporate the concepts elucidated in this article. It is essential to adopt new approaches that foster family system healing to remediate and prevent future intergenerational transmission of trauma. More research is necessary in the areas of intergenerational and historical traumas that affect marginalized groups to refine approaches for treatment of collective trauma.

            This article brought home to me the devastating multigenerational effects of European 

colonization of Native American lands and the unconscionable ethnocide that was carried out against 

the Native population. To facilitate healing among those Native Americans who experience 

intergenerational trauma, the dominant White European- descendant population must 

acknowledge an historical responsibility to help bring about healing and homeostasis.

                                                                    Citation

Cromer, L. D., Gray, M. E., Vasquez, L., & Freyd, J. J. (2018). The relationship of acculturation

          to historical loss awareness, institutional betrayal, and the intergenerational transmission of  

          trauma in the American Indian experience. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(1),

          99–114.            

Reflection on journal article"Standardized testing and school segregation...."

Elizabeth Cox's reflection on the journal article:

"Standardized testing and school segregation: 
Like tinder for fire?"

By Matthew Knoester and Wayne Au 

Citation:

Knoester, M., & Au, W. (2017). Standardized testing and school segregation: 
         Like tinder for fire? Race Ethnicity and Education, 20(1), 1–14.

                                                                 Reflection

            This article explores the relationship between high-stakes standardized testing and segregation of students by race or class in the U.S. education system. High-stakes standardized testing has become increasingly important in U.S. pedagogical approaches; at the same time, school re-segregation has gained ground in recent decades. Authors Knoester and Au posit that the outcome of high-stakes standardized testing combined with school choice practices has resulted in a system for racial coding that exacerbates segregation and inequities existing in our schools (Knoester & Au, 2017).

            Scholars who study high-stakes standardized testing have pointed to negative outcomes associated with the practice. Problems include curriculums tailored to tested subjects and the pressure put on schools and instructors to focus efforts on “bubble kids”- a practice that disadvantages other students. Design of the high-stakes standardized tests is skewed by lack of open discussion when deciding test content and the margin of sampling error inherent in short tests (Knoester & Au, 2017).

            The authors survey the history of segregation in schools and the flaws in desegregation plans that emerged from Brown v. Board of Education. As desegregation plans have been abandoned over time, de facto re-segregation has germinated and grown. In decades since the ruling by the Supreme Court that ‘separate educational facilities are inherently unequal’, studies have documented the positive effects yielded by desegregation. Desegregation benefits nonwhite and poor students without decreasing white and affluent student achievement. Integration mediates racial stereotyping by fostering cross-racial communication and respect. The psychological rewards intrinsic in integration are evident as feelings of alienation are assuaged in integrated school environments. The democratic ideals ingrained in U.S. public education align with integration praxes (Knoester & Au, 2017).

White resistance to desegregation has created hurdles and detours in the process of integration across the board. In many ways, Brown v. Board of Education was poorly implemented using flawed approaches. In some southern locales, black teachers lost their jobs (over 38,000), black community schools were shut down, and black students were treated poorly in multiracial schools that were created post Brown v Board. The injustices of early desegregation were manifold (Knoester & Au, 2017).

Knoester and Au point to use of standardized tests as ‘powerful managerial tools’ that supports racial coding. Racism has been evidenced in testing systems throughout U.S. history. Mental testing was used to justify the eugenics movement in the early 20^th century. In 1917, the Army implemented Alpha and Beta Army tests to sort recruits. This testing approach was used to promulgate the theory that intelligence of immigrants could be assessed in relation to their country of origin. Stanford-Binet intelligence tests were flawed and mirrored social class bias. Standardized intelligence tests were adopted as a means of sorting students by race and class. IQ test results have been tools of institutionalized self-fulfilling prophesy disguised as ‘scientific’ measure (Knoester & Au, 2017).

The authors apply Critical Race Theory (CRT) as a framework for explaining the mechanics of racism in schools. In addition, CRT explains how the relationship between race and legal property rights underpins racism in America. Race-neutral laws actually obfuscate inequalities – promulgating the ideology of meritocracy (Knoester & Au, 2017).

In my opinion, the future of the perspective presented in this article regarding standardized testing lies in further research and discussion on a national level. A re-evaluation of the ‘No Child Left Behind’ initiative is critical to the future of education in the U.S. New forms of assessment must be designed and developed to evaluate learning in our schools while reflecting respect for student diversity. Individual students learn in a variety of ways expressing a variety of aptitudes.

This article has made me aware of specific research and scholarly evaluation that highlights the injustice and inefficacy of high-stakes standardized testing. I am also aware of the monumental difficulty involved in efforts to undo this testing system rooted in historically supremacist methods of marginalizing populations. I propose a ‘No Child Codified’ initiative to reset our educational goals to a healthy paradigm. Who will captain the cause of educational reform to deliver unbiased education that is the foundation of an enlightened society?

Reflection on Technology in Higher Education

   A Tale of Two Cultures: Technological Advances in U.S.  Higher Education

By Elizabeth Joy Cox   

         As an information-privileged society, we stand at a crossroads where technological innovations are radically shifting the paradigm of higher education delivery. Higher education administrators are tasked with leading the move into an exciting new pedagogical architecture. In decades past, institutional change has flowed slowly as the bureaucratic river wound languidly toward the future. Siloed information and duplication of effort in university management have been considered an acceptable norm for generations. University administrators have been routinely focused on day-to-day problems that arise in the context of campus operations. Technology leadership has been placed in an adjunct position (Shark, 2015).

          Once upon a time, the primary function of technology was to automate previously manual tasks such as accounting, payroll, admissions, and data storage. Now, IT is the circulatory system of campus information flow. Bandwith is the carotid. Every part of the university system must now be connected to the whole.

          Traditionally, senior faculty members were the most likely candidates to move into administrative positions at universities – that was the established frame of the hierarchical ladder. This worked well in the not-for-profit model of classic higher education operations. Enter: for-profit schools utilizing every technological tool available to brand their organizations as cutting-edge tech-savvy learning destinations. Managing college operations via the for-profit model involves evaluating and reducing costs through application of a quantitative praxis (Shark, 2015).

           Added to the ensuing complexities and financial pressures borne by universities, current higher education laws and regulations encompass a new world view. In the legacy context of brick-and-mortar campus life, the in loco parentis model guided court decisions relevant to higher education. Now, risk management has taken on a life of its own. Universities strive to decrease overhead costs by hiring assistant instructors and lecturers, even as state financial support has declined and student debt has risen dramatically. Tuition fees rise to counter the economic adjustment (Shark, 2015).

          Today’s university leadership is compartmentalized to accommodate both the culture of business and the culture of academics (Shark, 2015) – two completely different ideological approaches attempting to effect cultural pluralism. Who will captain the ship? What will happen when Amazon enters the higher education delivery market? How swiftly will the remodeled/patched framework that has evolved into university technology management be swept away by competitive higher education entities riding the technology wave? Advances in technology have rendered many professions nearly obsolete in the last two decades. Will college instructors evolve to become free-lance workers focused on their personal branding and developing skills to deliver engaging video that entertains students?

                                                          References

Shark, A. R. (2015). The digital revolution in higher education : How and why the internet of everything is changing everything. Alexandria, VA: Public Technology Institute.

          

Culturally Relevant Teaching

                                                                      Scholarly Woman
                                            Culturally Relevant Teaching
By Elizabeth Joy Cox

            Efforts to usefully model the dynamics of human communities date back to the work of philosophers in ancient times. Complexities of a modern world inhabited by 7.6 billion people make the challenge to model equitable interactions between individuals and groups truly mind-boggling, especially when cultures are in constant flux. Cultural identity serves to anchor groups via shared symbols, language, values, social norms; cultural identity is part of the glue of civilization.

In my opinion, the best way to address and coalesce complex systems of communities is to create social hubs based on commonalities that may or may not hinge on ethnic or cultural factors. Social networks have made this process practical via the Internet in recent decades. I believe we’re on the right track, as a civilization, to create global cultural pluralism.

In the classroom, educators can support an inclusionary environment when values related to a variety of ethnic and cultural identities are recognized and respected. This requires establishment of clear interactive parameters. Such group parameters cannot completely capture microaggressions in the net of neutrality – but at least, with the instructor’s balanced oversight, the classroom can be a portal through which students emerge as more culturally astute and tolerant social citizens of the world.

            The text “Comprehensive Multicultural Education” by Christine Bennett explores how Gloria Ladson-Billings has been a leader in culturally relevant teaching research. She has formulated principles that serve as a framework for culturally relevant teaching. Karen Manheim Teel and Geneva Gay have also helped define characteristics of teachers who are highly culturally competent. Many teachers serve as models of the skillful application of principles that foster cultural pluralism in the classroom (Bennett, 2014). Perhaps their experiences will be shared widely through conferences, online videos, and documentaries. We have the technology.

                                              References

Bennett, C. I. (2014). Comprehensive multicultural education: Theory and practice (8th

        ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.