In a previous post, I pointed out how even the most radical article on social justice in the winter 2015-2016 edition of Leaders & Learners (the official magazine of the Canadian Association of School Administrators, or CASS) expresses the limited definition (and views) of middle-class ideology. This post will continue to critically analyze the content of this publication. This time, I will look at the article in that publication written by Bob Esliger, entited “Social Justice for Inclusive Schools.” Before looking at the article, though, it might prove useful to see who the author is.
Bob Esliger was or is Assistant Superintendent – Diversity and Equity at School District No. 068 (Nanaimo-Ladysmith), in British Columbia (the most western province in Canada). He has also been a classroom teacher, a special education teacher, a vice-principal and a principal. In addition, he has taught at Vancouver Island University. He thus has some classroom experience, but the bulk of his work experience in schools has been administrative.
In that article, Mr. Esliger writes on page 23:
Social justice often pertains to cultural and economic injustices of socially marginalized groups. However, we recognize the need to also focus on the injustices based on gender identity/sexual orientation and race. …
The social justice advocates will have a broader focus on inclusion that includes the lens of LGBTQ and racial identity as we strive to serve, celebrate and accept, rather than challenge, our diverse community. …
Curriculum documents contain a section on anti-discrimination education that encourages teachers to recognize the diversity of students’ backgrounds, interests and experiences, and to incorporate a variety of viewpoints and perspectives in learning activities. The NLPS [Nanaimo Ladysmith Public Schools Learning Plan Framework supports teachers to ensure their curriculum addresses the topics of gender-based violence, homophobia, sexual harassment and inappropriate sexual behaviour.
On page 24, class is mentioned, but only in terms of socio-economic status (level of income):
… we deem it important to clarify and create common affirmative language that defines inclusive education in terms of the acceptance of all persons regardless of race, ethnicity, disability, gender, sexual orientation, language, socio-economic status and any other aspect of an individual’s identity that might be perceived as different.
The focus of social justice here is anti-discrimination on the basis of gender, race or sexual orientation. The reference to socio-economic status (as equivalent to class), as has been shown in the previous post on this topic, is woefully inadequate when dealing with real class power and objective domination of human beings by things, or the conversion of human beings into things to be used impersonally for purposes over which they have little or no control. The exclusion of class exploitation from the article illustrates the blindness of the school system to social injustice of an economic, social and political structure that systematically uses human beings as things and as means for a social structure over which workers and citizens have little control.
It could, of course, be said that it is necessary to focus on certain forms of injustice since other articles in the publication deal more adequately with the issue of class. However, as I indicated in my previous post on this topic (School Rhetoric: Ideological Use of the Concept of Social Justice, Part One), the most radical article by Victor Brar definitely lacks an adequate characterization of class society because the concept of class is restricted to level of income.
Of course, it is necessary to fight against discrimination based on race, gender and sexual orientation. It is also necessary to recognize that children from more impoverished families may suffer economic disadvantages when compared to children from more affluent families. However, in an article that purports to deal with social justice, the silence over the nature of class power, class exploitation and the way in which that exploitation assumes an objective form of a relation between things that dominate human beings rather than human beings dominating things expresses the class bias of the article.
The Abolitionary 