TEACHERS’ COLLABORATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ANTIRACISM UNIT IN THE KINDERGARTEN CLASSROOM

by
Jennifer Lynn Ofeimu
Bachelor of Arts – University of Victoria 1987
Certification of Teaching – University of the Fraser Valley 2012

MAJOR PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF EDUCATION
(EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND MENTORSHIP)

In the
Teacher Education Department
© Jennifer Lynn Ofeimu 2021
UNIVERSITY OF THE FRASER VALLEY
2021
All rights reserved. This work may not be
reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy
or other means, without permission of the author.

ii

Approval
Name: Jennifer Lynn Ofeimu
Degree: Master of Education (Educational Leadership and Mentorship)
Title:
Examining Committee:
Name: Dr. Awneet Sivia
MEd Chair or Designate, Teacher Education Department
____________________________________________________________

Name: Dr. Nikki Lynne Yee
Senior Supervisor
Educational Consultant

____________________________________________________________

Name: Dr. Joanna Sheppard
Second Reader
Associate Professor, Teacher Education Program
____________________________________________________________
Date Defended/Approved: June 12, 2021

iii

Abstract
Racism and Anti-racism are complex issues that can be challenging for educators to
navigate. Learning how to support educators to examine their own identities and engage in antiracism education is critical. As such, this research asks: (a) “How do early primary educators
situate themselves in anti-racism education?” and (b) “What systems do early primary educators
find supportive to engage in anti-racism education?” The literature review includes a broad
definition of racism, a discussion on the hidden curriculum and anti-racism education, and
finally, a review of the professional development and practices that promote systemic change.
This research is a case study of four teachers’ (three kindergarten and one support teacher) lived
experience collaborating and implementing an anti-racism unit in the kindergarten classroom.
The analysis revealed that leadership can foster systemic changes to facilitate anti-racism
education by providing time for planned self-regulated collaboration embedded with supports
that reduce risk and promote relational trust.
Key words: Anti-Racism Education, Kindergarten, Early Primary, Collaboration, Inquiry,
Pathologies of Silence

iv

Acknowledgements
My gratitude goes to my supervisor Dr. Nikki Yee for her kind and patient mentorship.
Her guidance and enthusiasm for my research were inspiring and greatly appreciated. I thank her
for the resources, the thought-provoking questions, and the many engaging conversations. Also, I
want to extend my gratitude to Dr. Joanna Sheppard for her insights and supports as the second
reader.
My loving family, who are always my inspiration to be the best version of me. Thank
you, girls, for coming to sit with me while I write. Thank you, Mac, for the cups of coffee in the
morning and the tea at night. Most of all, thank you for coming into my office to provide a warm
hug. Your support means the world to me.
To the four teachers who came along this journey with me, this work was possible
because of you. You are brave, you are kind, and you brilliantly shine. I look forward to our
future “good trouble” (Lewis, 2018).
To my Master of Education cohort, a fabulous group of people. Thank you for the colearning and the collegial camaraderie. I miss our pre-pandemic Friday dinners. I have received
valuable gifts from each of you. To my “TARG,” getting to know each of you was beautiful, and
it was great to reach out to those who “get it.”
Last but not least, thank you to all the instructors of the UFV MEd program; Dr. Awneet
Sivia, Dr. Sheryl MacMath. Alison Davies, Ian Levings, and the late Michael Woods. I am so
grateful for your servant leadership; you have transformed my perceptions of leadership. The
work was rigorous, but as are all life-changing experiences.

v

Dedication
To all the change-makers along the way, it is your shoulders we stand upon with gratitude.

“I have great belief in the fact that whenever there is chaos, it creates wonderful thinking.
I consider chaos a wonderful gift.”
– Katherine Melon Charron, Freedom's Teacher: The Life of Septima Clark

vi

Table of Contents
Abstract........................................................................................................................ iii
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ......................................................................................................................v
Table of Contents......................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ............................................................................................................... ix
Introduction ...................................................................................................................1
Purpose.................................................................................................................................. 1
Early Learning in British Columbia .................................................................................... 2
Problem ................................................................................................................................. 3
Positionality........................................................................................................................... 4
Scholarly Significance and Research Questions .................................................................. 7

Literature Review ..........................................................................................................8
Definitions - Racism as a Social Construction ..................................................................... 8
Acknowledging Privilege.................................................................................................. 11
Power is Pervasive............................................................................................................ 12
Anti-Racism Education ..................................................................................................... 12
Envisioning New Possibilities - Anti-Racism is Good for Everyone .................................. 14
Understanding Disengagement - To Engage Dialogue and Action .................................... 15
Beliefs and Values - Racism as Pervasive and Not Individualistic ..................................... 15
Contextual Barriers ........................................................................................................... 17
Emotional Literacy ........................................................................................................... 17
Understanding Pathologies of Silence ............................................................................... 18
Moving Forward to Initiate Change................................................................................... 19

vii

Transformational Professional Development for Anti-Racism Education........................... 20
Practice that Promotes Systemic Change ........................................................................... 22
Summary ............................................................................................................................. 23

Methodology ................................................................................................................ 23
Context ................................................................................................................................ 25
Setting .............................................................................................................................. 25
Participants....................................................................................................................... 25
Research Methods ............................................................................................................... 27
Step 1 - Collaboration Before Teaching ............................................................................ 27
Step 2 – Teaching the Anti-racism Unit............................................................................. 28
Step 3 – Team Debriefings/Collaboration.......................................................................... 29
Step 4 – Final Interviews. ................................................................................................. 30
Managing Bias .................................................................................................................... 31
Triangulation .................................................................................................................... 31
Member Checks................................................................................................................ 31
Expert Reader ................................................................................................................... 32
Data Sources and Analysis ................................................................................................. 32
Unit Framework-Lesson Plans .......................................................................................... 33
Participant Weekly Debriefing/Collaboration Reflections ................................................. 33
Debriefing Notes .............................................................................................................. 33
Final Interview ................................................................................................................. 34
Collective Data ................................................................................................................. 34

Results .......................................................................................................................... 35
Research Question One: Pre-Collaboration and Implementation of the Unit .................. 35
Research Question One: Post-Collaboration and Implementation of the Unit ................. 37

viii

Research Question Two: Responsive Co-Planning ............................................................ 38
Differentiating According to Planning Styles .................................................................... 38
Providing Resources ......................................................................................................... 39
Together We Can.............................................................................................................. 40
Research Question Two: Co-construction of Knowledge .................................................. 41
Trust Provides Confidence to ask Critical Questions ......................................................... 41
Research Question Two: Responsive Co-Teaching............................................................ 43
Co-teacher Observing and Scribing Students’ Responses .................................................. 43
Multiple Perspectives in the Classroom ............................................................................. 44
Experiencing Student Responses Together ........................................................................ 45

Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 47
Research Question One: Listening to Understand Educator’s Readiness ........................ 47
Research Question Two: Generative Possibilities .............................................................. 50
Research Question Two: Responsive Pedagogy Builds Trust............................................ 52

Limitations ................................................................................................................... 55
Implications and Recommendations ........................................................................... 55
Final Thoughts ............................................................................................................. 57
References .................................................................................................................... 59
Appendix A .................................................................................................................. 67
Appendix B .................................................................................................................. 68
Appendix C .................................................................................................................. 69
Appendix D .................................................................................................................. 71
Appendix E .................................................................................................................. 73

ix

List of Tables
i. Table 1 Demographics of Teacher Participants ........................................................... 26

1

Introduction
Purpose
This research aims to create supportive possibilities for in-service teachers to engage in
anti-racism education, particularly primary teachers in the Western Canadian context. When I
began my inquiry into anti-racism education, I found there was limited research in this context.
The lack of research is a concern, as it leads to significant ambiguity and unanswered questions
for primary educators to engage in anti-racism education. More significantly, the lack of research
may lead primary educators to wonder if they should engage in anti-racism education with
children at such a young age. The urgency to find answers to these questions becomes amplified
when school districts encourage educators to take anti-racism action.
In the past year, several of British Columbia’s (B.C.) mainland School Districts initiated
an anti-racism stance by adapting district policies, working groups, and district-wide
frameworks. For example, the Vancouver, Mission, and Surrey School Boards have updated or
incorporated new anti-racism policies (Mission School District, 2021; Surrey School District,
2021; Vancouver School District, 2020). The Superintendent of the Langley School District
wrote an open letter to the district’s parents/guardians and staff members outlining the district’s
anti-racism stance. He included in the letter that the district incorporated an Anti-racism Working
Group (Langley School District, 2021). The Abbotsford School District has developed a
framework for Equitable and Inclusive Schools (Abbotsford School District, n.d.). The
framework includes four domains: (a) Individuality - Deepening Equity Consciousness, (b)
Interpersonal - Healing for Equity, (c) Structural - Dismantling Oppressive Structures, (d)
Pedagogical - Embracing Responsive Pedagogy (Abbotsford School District, n.d.). The

2

framework’s recommendations are consistent with anti-racism narratives (E.g., Aveling, 2006;
Bennett, 2019; Knowles & Hawkman), especially when it suggests teachers “Interrogate our
assumptions, biases and beliefs,” “explore our own identities in relation to others,” and “explore
the nature of our connectedness and the kinds of discourse we have within our school
communities about various student populations” (Abbotsford School District, n.d.). These are
essential starting points for educators if they want to address systemic racism. However, to bring
the framework’s objectives to fruition, schools and educators will need to prioritize the work.
While School Districts are initiating anti-racism policies and frameworks, providing staff with
guidance and skills to enact new anti-racism initiatives is essential.
Early Learning in British Columbia
Although limited research is published on anti-racism education in the primary school
years, B.C.’s focus on early primary education presents a viable context for anti-racism
education at the onset of students’ academic careers. The revised Early Learning Framework is
directly connected to B.C.’s curriculum and core competencies (B.C. Ministry of Education,
2021). The document is written in partnership with Indigenous Elders and organizations, primary
educators, and the B.C. government. It is an invitation for all stakeholders to re-envision early
learning spaces for all students up to grade three (B.C. Ministry of Education, 2019). One
intention of the framework is to promote dialogue about the understandings of early childhood,
knowledge, education, and learning (B.C. Ministry of Education, 2019). Critical to the narrative
of anti-racism work is that the Early Learning Framework document illuminates’ challenges to
the values and assumptions embedded in prevalent developmental theories that evolved from
particular social and political contexts. Dominant educational theory promoting universal best
practices privilege Eurocentric ideologies and silence other perspectives (Pacini-Ketchabaw et

3

al., 2015, as cited in B.C. Ministry of Education, 2019). Furthermore, the Early Learning
Framework (B.C. Ministry of Education, 2019) incorporates several principles that do not
directly address but open possibilities for anti-racism education:
(a) Children are strong, capable in their uniqueness, and full of potential. (b) Families
have the most important role in contributing to children’s well-being and learning. (c)
Educators are researchers and collaborators. (d) Early years spaces are inclusive. (e)
People build connection and reconnection to land, culture, community, and place. (f)
Environments are integral to well-being and learning. (g) Play is integral to well-being
and learning. (h) Relationships are the context for well-being and learning. (i) Learning is
holistic. (p.15)
Hence, the framework’s principles observe children as competent and holistic beings capable of
acting on their world in purposeful ways, ready to build meaningful connections to peers,
community, culture, and place. Thus, anti-racism education has its place in the early learning
context, aligning with the directives many school districts in British Columbia are developing.
Problem
Educators may struggle to engage in this critical work without viable supports. For
example, the Abbotsford School District’s Equitable and Inclusive Schools Framework lays out
complex initiatives. Without supportive systems to facilitate implementation, it is difficult to see
how this framework will become a dynamic action-orientated intervention. Firstly, exploring our
own identities in relation to others and interrogating our biases and beliefs depends on the
assumption that educators actively explore or understand their own racial identities. Examining
racial identities centred in the Western Eurocentric paradigm is a complex task (Aveling, 2006).
It involves interrogating one’s own beliefs and values to get to the core of racialized biases

4

(DiAngelo, 2018; Kendi, 2019). Delgado and Stefanic (2017) may see this examination as
problematic for White educators as they often do not see themselves as racialized. As a result,
they do not examine their own racial identity.
Secondly, examining the connectedness to others through discourse in school
communities would require educators to be engaged in dialogue with one another on racialized
issues. In my experience, many educators exist in a paradox; they may identify the importance
for their students to create positive racial identities, yet they maintain a pervasive silence about
race that ultimately diminishes the importance of diversity. When educators decide to embrace
anti-racism education, examining their personal beliefs and values involving race is fundamental
to their journey (Egbo, 2009; Vaught and Castagno, 2008; Ullucci, 2012). However, to fully
address the pervasiveness of dialogic paralysis requires a critical look at systemic structures
(Kendi, 2019; Safir, 2017). Transgressing racialized silence to a place of generative dialogue
requires leadership that is willing to address systemic changes (Adams et al., 2019; Safir, 2017).
Without this examination, meeting the equity and inclusion frameworks’ primary objectives
becomes problematic, and communities remain fragmented by unresolved systemic racism.
Positionality
Before I engage in a deeper conversation on this topic, I invite you to learn about my
positionality as a mother, wife, and educator in connection to anti-racism. My lived experiences
have generated an understanding of the commitment required to examine my beliefs, values, and
biases to engage in this critical work. I am a third-generation White European Settler, born and
raised on Vancouver Island. I spent most of my formative years in Victoria, British Columbia.
As an adult, I have spent more than half my life residing on the lower mainland of British
Columbia. My family and I reside on the S’olh Temexw (sacred lands) of the Stó:lō Peoples. I

5

am cisgender, a wife, a mother, a teacher, middle-class, neurotypical, and despite spending the
last year with the rest of the world in the COVID-19 pandemic (Government of Canada, 2020), I
have stable mental health, finances, and connected relationships. I state this information as my
acknowledgment that I experience privilege as the mainstream Western Eurocentric paradigm
centres many intersections of my identity.
Years ago, I started a deep introspection into my racialized privilege when I came to
understand that my own immediate family did not experience the same privileges that I am
afforded. My husband and I have been married for thirty years, and we have three adult
daughters. My husband is a Nigerian, Black, cisgender male, and we were committed to raising
our daughters in a culturally fluid home. It became clear to me how I took my privilege for
granted. I never searched for the positive, self-affirming representation of my European, White
identity in media but finding the same for my daughters was challenging. Meritocracy always
worked for me. I achieved recognition for my hard work, both academically and professionally.
The colour of my skin has never associated me with any biases, talents, behaviours, or emotions.
I have not experienced overt racialized comments or aggressions. Painfully, I can not say the
same for my family.
My husband and I were very intentional in supporting our daughters to gain positive
identities. I recall one family dinner when our girls were younger. My husband had just finished
telling our daughters a childhood story as a boy back in Nigeria. The girls were laughing at their
father’s story, and our middle daughter, probably five at the time, sighed and said in a very
woeful voice, “I feel so sad for Mommy.” When we asked her why she replied, “She is the only
one that is not African in our family.” For her, this was a very sad thing. The insight of her
revelation as a young and innocent child, to me, was rather profound. She felt a sense of

6

belonging, and she was concerned that I might not have that same connectedness. However, her
statements demonstrate that children are racially aware and know when they are centred and
valued at this young age.
Our role as parents was to ensure our daughters felt the same centeredness in the world
outside of our home. We encouraged open and honest dialogue in our family to normalize
conversations about race and identity. At times, it meant helping the girls navigate conversations
with peers to set boundaries around biases. Significantly, it meant keeping our family friends
diverse and modelling that our lives were more meaningful for the experiences we shared. In
return, my children knew they were valued and loved by a diverse range of people. I want the
same experience for all our students. Every child needs to know their value and worth, and
educators at all grade levels can facilitate this understanding through intentional actions.
I can not deny, understanding of my Whiteness is supported by my personal family
experience. However, unpacking my privilege required immersing myself in vital learning by
actively listening, reading diversely, and reflecting on my biases. I had to embrace and ride
through my discomforts, and I continue to do so. With so many things yet to learn and
understand, I acknowledge that engaging in allyship and anti-racism is not a finite destination. It
is a continuum of my growth. I have made a lifelong commitment to learning to identify,
dismantle, and relearn new ways of being and doing. The personal accountability I have taken to
engage in anti-racism work helps to inform me in my research.
The experience of understanding my privilege has raised my consciousness as an
educator. I am critical of how and what I am teaching students in the classroom. My practice as a
learning assistance teacher (LAT) has always centred around equity and inclusion, not just in
race but in many intersections of student identity. I am engaged with my colleagues in learning

7

and sharing inclusive pedagogy in our school, but it tends to focus on physical-cognitive-neuro
diversity. I desire to open the conversation and engagement with anti-racism pedagogy to add
another intersection of inclusivity and equity within elementary schools.
I have reflected deeply on the need for equity and inclusion to build healthy and
connected communities, and I recognize the insurmountable work in front of us. I have given
considerable thought to the roles educators can play in creating equitable and inclusive
communities where all people, with diverse intersections, have physical and emotional wellbeing and are recognized and valued for their contributions to society. Imagining the possibilities
of inclusive communities creates a sense of joy within me. My reflections led me to the quote of
Septima Clark, an educator and civil rights activist. “I have great belief in the fact that whenever
there is chaos, it creates wonderful thinking. I consider chaos a wonderful gift” (Charron, 2009,
p.354). I choose to become a wonderful thinker. I position the problems that I have outlined as an
opportunity to uncover possibilities for primary educators. In particular, to engage in
conversations about their identity in relation to the students’ diversity in their classroom and
engage in anti-racism education.
Scholarly Significance and Research Questions
My inquiry question ascends from my desire to ensure all students obtain a sense of
belonging within the classroom and that teachers are supported as they make shifts in their
practice. Educators may have difficulty unpacking their identities in isolation (Matias & Mackey,
2016). If the mirror is only held up to oneself, the reflection is limited to a singular perspective.
However, looking through windows to the world beyond the singular experience provides
opportunities to examine oneself through multiple perspectives. Dismantling core values is
challenging but significant work that assists educators to move to a place of action. What is

8

requested of educators to engage in anti-racism work can not be underestimated in its
complexity. With the objective of supporting educators in becoming anti-racism educators, I ask
the following research questions: (a) “How do early primary educators situate themselves in antiracism education?” and (b) “What systems do early primary educators find supportive to engage
in anti-racism education?”
Creating connected, healthy communities benefits us all, and initiating this work at the
onset of children’s academic careers is powerful and exciting. It is hoped this study can inform
school and district leadership and primary teachers of the possibilities available to navigate into
the space of becoming anti-racism educators. This research is for the primary educators that are
brave enough to address racial inequities, or as the late John Lewis (2018) urged us to make
“good trouble”.
Literature Review
In this research, I seek to find how teachers situate themselves in anti-racism education.
Also, I want to learn what systems will support primary teachers to engage in anti-racism
education. Given this focus, scholarly definitions of racism in the broader social context provide
a critical starting point. Then I will position racism within the school setting and define antiracism education. Next, I will review the literature to understand the phenomena that perpetuate
teachers’ disengagement from discourse and engagement in anti-racism education. Lastly, I
explore systems that facilitate educators’ engagement in generative dialogue to foster anti-racism
education and activities that promote systemic change within schools.
Definitions - Racism as a Social Construction
Attaining a clear understanding of racism creates a foundation for educators to appreciate
the importance of examining their identity in relation to the students they teach. It also provides

9

an opportunity to identify the necessity of taking action in anti-racism education. Delgado and
Stefanic (2017), two renowned scholars in Critical Race Theory (CRT), provide a provocative
definition of racism. They define racism as having three main attributes.
The first attribute of racism is that it is ordinary and challenging to address because it is
not often acknowledged (Delgado & Stefanic, 2017). The dominant group’s values are presented
as “normal,” and they are even valued as necessary for success in society (Delgado & Stefanic,
2017; Saad, 2020; Vaught & Castagno, 2008). Many organizations such as politics, health care,
law enforcement, and education prevalently practice Eurocentric values (Egbo, 2009). For
example, in education, Eurocentric dominant values show up in the curriculum in schools (Egbo,
2009). Traditionally dominant values are apparent from the kindergarten to grade twelve
curriculums, found in historical narratives focusing on the single perspective, the literature in
class and school libraries, and embedded in math and science processes. However, it can also be
observed as excessive scrutiny of certain racial groups or devaluing non-dominant groups’ ways
of knowing and doing (Egbo, 2009). White people often have the freedom of not thinking about
or discussing their race because it is considered normal (DiAngelo, 2018; Knowles & Hawkman,
2020; Mosley, 2010; Ullucci, 2012). Thus, it requires an explicit examination of self to develop
an awareness of how the Western Eurocentric paradigm does not afford the same normalization
of beliefs, values, and ways of knowing and doing to all people in society.
The second attribute of racism is that it is a hierarchical system placing White people
above Black, Indigenous, and Peoples of Colour (BIPOC; Delgado & Stefanic, 2017; Kendi
2019; Menakem, 2017). Dominant Eurocentric groups often benefit materially and emotionally
as meritocracy works for them (Delgado & Stefanic, 2017; DiAngelo, 2018). The system that
centers their beliefs, values, and ways of knowing and doing has demonstrated that they can

10

achieve their goals if they work hard. Not all White people become successful, but their racial
identity is usually not considered a barrier (Kendi, 2019). Delgado and Stefanic (2017) suggest
that if the system works for a large portion of society, then they have limited incentive to
eradicate racism if it does not impact them. However, when educators become aware that social
systems do not treat or value all students equitably, they may be motivated to advocate for
systemic change to increase opportunities for BIPOC students.
Lastly, race is not biologically grounded but rather a product of social thoughts and
relations (Delgado & Stefanic, 2017; Kendi, 2019; Menakem, 2017). Thus, race is a social
construction to benefit the dominant racial group (Delgado & Stefanic, 2017; Kendi, 2019;
Menakem, 2017). Racialized groups were typically identified by physical features and believed
to be intellectually, physically, and culturally inferior (Egbo, 2009; Kendi, 2019; Menakem,
2017). These socially constructed beliefs justified denying equitable access to privileges afforded
to the dominant culture (Egbo, 2009; Kendi, 2019). The construction of race historically justified
the exploitation of BIPOC and created beliefs, values, and biases that continue to permeate
society (Kendi, 2019; Menakem, 2017). Racism is considered an enduring structure in the
Western Eurocentric paradigm that must be challenged to create more equitable and healthy
communities (Amiot et al., 2020; Kendi, 2019; Vaught & Castagno, 2008).
All three domains of racism can operate at an individual, institutional, or systemic level.
Individual racism is the most overtly observed with racialized opinions and actions of individual
people (Delgado & Stefanic, 2017; DiAngelo, 2018; Kendi, 2019). Institutional racism is the
policies and laws that are held within various institutions such as law enforcement, education,
real estate, and health care that benefit White people and place BIPOC at a disadvantage
(Delgado & Stefanic, 2017; DiAngelo, 2018; Kendi, 2019). These institutions are interrelated

11

and create a system of racism or systemic racism (Delgado & Stefanic, 2017). The literature
views systemic racism as most virulent because it pervasively denies non-dominant groups
access to what society offers White people (Egbo, 2009; Kendi, 2019). The denial is based on the
socially constructed ideas around the supposed inferiority and the unfounded behaviours,
aptitudes, and emotions associated with various skin colours (Egbo, 2009; Kendi, 2019;
Menakem, 2017). However, if racism is socially constructed, racism should be capable of
deconstruction and the pernicious beliefs challenged (Delgado & Stefanic, 2017). If educators
value building equitable societies, their actions can impact dismantling racism and help to
provide students with optimistic futures of connection and inclusion.
Acknowledging Privilege
White People benefit from the normalization of “Whiteness,” and it is referred to as
privilege. Often the privileges associated with White racial classification are perpetuated
subconsciously (Bennett, 2019; Bennett & Driver et al., 2019; DiAngelo, 2018; Knowles &
Hawkman, 2020; Mosley, 2010; Ullucci, 2012). McIntosh (1988), a feminist, anti-racism
scholar, coined the term “White privilege.” She made an analogy of White privilege to owning
an invisible knapsack, “of unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about
which I was meant to remain oblivious” (McIntosh,1989 p.1). The analogy describes how White
people can expect freedoms that they can take advantage of every day, based solely on the colour
of their skin. McIntosh (1989) describes White privilege as showing up in several ways in the
Eurocentric paradigm, including (a) White parents can be assured that their White children will
receive curricular materials that will acknowledge the existence of their race; (b) when
discussing national heritage, White people will see representations of themselves declaring they
made the nation what it is; (c) there is a plethora of quality picture books, toys, and children’s

12

magazines featuring White children (McIntosh,1989). These are a few examples of privilege that
pertain to this discussion on anti-racism work within the elementary school system. These ideas
on privilege formed the basis for the discussions amongst the educators in this case study.
Power is Pervasive
In the context of anti-racism education, it is essential to clarify the definition of “power.”
Power is often thought of as one entity dominant over the other entity to obtain a prescribed
action. However, the French philosopher Michel Foucault creates a paradigm shift in how power
is defined and utilized. Foucault states that power is omnipresent, and knowledge is a socialized
phenomenon (Fendler, 2014; Taylor, 2011). Thus, knowledge is not always representative of
reality, but something humans construct to exercise power (Fendler, 2014). School routines and
curriculum privilege knowledge that facilitates White People’s use of power. At the same time,
this knowledge systematically excludes BIPOC Peoples and impedes their ability to exercise
power. Hence, in anti-racism education, providing all students equitable access to power by
creating and legitimizing knowledge beyond the Western Eurocentric paradigm becomes a
deliberate action.
Anti-Racism Education
When White educators understand that dominant ideologies often shape their beliefs and
values, they can examine their biases and engage in critical self-examination of how and what
they teach in their classroom. Egbo (2009) takes a critical lens in preparing teachers for diverse
classrooms in the Canadian context. The following discussion on the hidden curriculum
illuminates how systemic racism permeates the educational setting. (Bennett & LeCompte, 1995;
Henry & Tator, 2006, as cited in Egbo, 2009):

13

A substantive amount of what students learn is not openly stated, even though such
implicitly conveyed knowledge (the hidden curriculum) underpins student and teacher
behaviour. Generally defined as the behaviours, attitudes, and knowledge the school
unintentionally teaches through its content selection, routines, and social relationships,
the hidden curriculum provides additional space for spreading dominant ideologies in
schools and consequently promotes institutional racism (p. 9).
Egbo’s (2009) discussion on the hidden curriculum informs the need for anti-racism
education. The crux of unveiling the hidden curriculum begins with teachers explicitly
examining their identity and biases in relation to the students within their classroom (Cui, 2017;
Ullucci, 2012). For decades, several scholars have addressed the critical conversation about the
lack of cultural and racial congruency between teachers and their students (Calliste & Dei 2000;
Egbo, 2009; hooks, 1994; Ladson-Billings, 1995). Educators are encouraged to identify their
biases reinforced by Eurocentric ideologies to engage in anti-racism pedagogy (Calliste & Dei,
2000; Cui, 2017; DiAngelo, 2018; Egbo, 2009; Ullucci, 2012). The literature claims that when
educators fail to reflect upon their biases, they may perpetuate Eurocentric ideologies that lack
positive representation for all students (Cui, 2017; Bennett, 2019; Ullucci, 2012).
Traditionally, Canadian schools are organized around hierarchal models of instruction,
negating the value of different ways of knowing and doing (Cui, 2017; Egbo, 2009). This historic
model conveys who has value and whose voice matters through curriculum, the school calendar,
hallway displays, school spirit days, and collections in school libraries (Cui, 2017; Egbo, 2009).
Thus, stripping down the hidden curriculum through understanding privilege, examining
personal biases, and normalizing power are positive steps towards anti-racism education.

14

When White educators engage in anti-racism education, the work involves shifting their
world views and representing and connecting to the diversity within the classroom. It is much
more than a token celebration of diversity but intentional activism and pedagogical practices
(Egbo, 2009; Dei,1996). Anti-racism theorists believe this level of intervention is required
because incorporating multi-cultural experiences into the curriculum is not enough to combat
racism (Egbo, 2009). Anti-racism education focuses on the salience of race and equalizing the
social positioning of students through equitable actions. The normalization of power in education
must be taken very seriously as it can mean “education either does something to you or it can do
something for you” (Dei, 2014, p.240). Thus, schools and educators can either be solutions or
contributors to systemic racism; it depends on their actions (Egbo, 2009). Students can
experience a liberating education when they are authentically represented, provided choices on
how they wish to engage in their learning, and offered continuous opportunities to share their
voice within their learning community (Cui, 2017; Dei, 2014; Egbo, 2009; hooks, 1994; Safir,
2017). Anti-racism pedagogical approaches of delivering choice and valuing students’ voice can
happen from the start of every child’s academic experience in the Canadian context.
Envisioning New Possibilities - Anti-Racism is Good for Everyone
Opening up and valuing other perspectives in this conversation is honouring anti-racism
work. Also, examining diverse perspectives creates more possibilities to approach and
conceptualize anti-racism education. Anti-racism education framed as a movement towards
acknowledging the strength of diversity as vital to a community’s health positions the work in
terms of universal benefits. Examining decolonizing literature creates a vision of what
educational settings can strive towards in creating equitable and connected communities.
Indigenous scholar Dwayne Donald (2016) shares his learnings from Cree Elders, framing the

15

need for diversity through an ecological understanding, “Ethical relationality does not deny
difference, nor does it promote assimilation of it. Rather, ethical relationality supports the
conceptualization of difference in ecological terms as necessary for life and living to continue”
(Donald, 2016, p.11). In essence, communities with low diversity become weak and unstable
(Donald, 2016). Re-positioning educators to view diversity in their classroom as a strength builds
ethical relationships with their students (Yee, 2020). Indigenous or decolonizing perspectives can
help educators re-frame anti-racism work as a movement forward; diversity adds vitality and life
to promote healthy learning communities from which we all benefit.
Understanding Disengagement - To Engage Dialogue and Action
Prior to developing strategies for teachers to engage in anti-racism education, it is critical
to understand teachers’ disengagement. This section of the literature review examines barriers
that educators may experience, including the teacher’s beliefs and values, contextual barriers,
emotional literacy, and the need for organizational support.
Beliefs and Values - Racism as Pervasive and Not Individualistic
The definition provided earlier discussed how racism is difficult to detect, which is also
true for educators. White teachers who are unaware of their privilege may struggle to engage in
anti-racism education. Saad (2020) points out “you cannot change what you can not see” and
“you cannot dismantle what you do not understand” (p.38). Vaught & Castagno (2008) point out
that self-awareness of privilege is often limited because a lack of structural awareness
accompanies it. Furthermore, the structure is very self-preserving, influencing social interactions
and even the way people think in the educational system (Miled, 2009). Thus, creating
opportunities for educators to examine identity and developing structural awareness becomes
more significant.

16

It is essential to examine how professional development meets the needs of teachers to
gain awareness of how their racial biases impact the students they teach. A study conducted by
Vaught and Castagno (2008) discusses how a one-day professional development failed to support
the teacher’s understanding of systemic racism and how it contributed to the racialized students’
low academic performances. Teachers’ statements attributed low scores to the behaviours of the
students. Many of the teachers defined themselves as hard-working teachers, and they were sorry
for the past. However, they had nothing to do with slavery and other wrongdoings of racialized
people, and thus racism was not understood as their responsibility (Vaught and Castagno, 2008).
The educators’ statements in Vaught and Castagno’s (2008) study may indicate how
some teachers may see racism solely as individualistic acts and not as pervasive and systemic.
DiAngelo (2018) would explain their responses as examples of how individuals view racism in
terms of a binary. Often people see racism in terms of good-bad; I am a good person, and
therefore, I can not possibly be racist (DiAngelo, 2018). However, their statements also support
classifications of colour-blindness that may impede self-examination of racialized issues. In this
example, colour-blindness may be understood as (a) Cultural racism – there are cultural deficits,
and as a result, the suffering is at the hands of the racialized groups’ own harmful doing, (b)
Minimization of racism – racism is no longer a central factor, and (c) Abstract liberalism – that
systemic racism is a thing of the past, and equal political, economic, and social opportunities are
available; thus, equity has been achieved (Decuir-Gunby et al., 2020; Jayakumar & Adamian,
2017). As such, the limited scope of one-time professional development can not address
educators’ overarching beliefs and values. Providing educators with support systems that allow
for examination of their racialized identity will assist them to understand they can either maintain

17

or dismantle oppressive educational structures (Amiot, Mayer-Glenn, et al., 2020; Jayakumar &
Adamian, 2017; Knowles & Hawkman, 2020; Vaught & Castagno, 2008).
Contextual Barriers
White educators may be disengaged from anti-racism education because they may not
have the tools to support their journey. A study conducted by Alaca and Ryle (2018) involving
six teachers from the Toronto area acknowledged significant barriers that the teachers faced
when teaching to the diversity in their classrooms. There was a lack of access to vetted resources,
such as books and play materials (Alaca & Ryle, 2018). Often teachers had to go to costly
specialty stores for diverse resources for their classrooms. The teachers expressed a lack of
knowledge in teaching to the students’ diversity, and they placed high importance on wanting to
do it well (Alaca & Ryle, 2018). Finally, they said an absence of professional development was
also problematic (Alaca & Ryle, 2018). Often, teachers were selected to attend district
professional development and then report back to their teams. Teachers not attending the
sessions usually did not implement the strategies because the passing of information was a quick
synopsis of the professional development (Alaca & Ryle, 2018). Providing teachers with
resources and transformational professional development opportunities may support educators
engaging and sustaining their activism in anti-racism education.
Emotional Literacy
Teachers may experience a range of emotions when engaging in anti-racism education,
ranging from feelings of guilt to futility. These feelings might be a barrier to engaging with antiracism education. Matias and Mackey (2016) state that teachers require emotional literacy to
work through possible emotions of guilt and shame. They add, if educators are not emotionally
ready to engage in conversations of racism, they are not emotionally secure enough to engage in

18

anti-racism pedagogy, especially for the long term. However, teaching is a risky endeavour; if
educators wait to initiate a new practice until they reach being “emotionally ready,” they may
never or significantly delay engaging in the new practice. Professional learning takes place in the
social context, and establishing trust, safety, and a reasonable amount of vulnerability can help
teachers engage in practices (Adams et al., 2019; Twyford et al., 2017). Understanding that
teachers may likely experience vulnerable emotions when first engaging in anti-racism
education, it is critical that supports are created to build confidence to promote and sustain
engagement.
Understanding Pathologies of Silence
There is also the challenge of having educators recognize and label racism within their
settings. Miled (2019) observed a strong resistance from the teacher participants in her research
to even talk about racism. It was as if merely mentioning the word “racism” would ruin the
image of the school district, and this confirms “how diversity-proud organizations are often the
ones that defend hardest against hearing about racism” (p. 91). Parhar and Sensoy (2011) shared
that often in professional development sessions, Canadian teachers in the Lower Mainland of
B.C. experienced discomfort in critical conversations about race and some teachers expressed
resistance to the content of the professional development.
DiAngelo (2018) provides another perspective regarding silence. If individuals speak up
against racism, they can risk being accused of being angry, humourless, combative, and not
suited to go far in the institution. As a result, individuals may avoid conflict and remain silent.
Often silence is rewarded with “social capital as being fun, cooperative, and a team player” (p.
58). These reasons are very legitimate concerns for educators to remain silent about racism.

19

However, if schools shift their culture to encourage open and non-judgemental conversations,
educators may engage in dialogue.
Another point of view on silence in the literature is that silence is not benign, and it is not
neutrality; it is a dynamic full of self-protection (Kendi, 2017; Saad, 2020). The literature
suggests that when White people remain silent about racism, it communicates: I am fine with the
way things are because they do not negatively affect me. I enjoy the benefits I receive with White
privilege (Kendi, 2017; Saad, 2020). Shields (2004) contributes to the conversation on silence by
stating that educators are often uncomfortable with differences and thus fail to hear diverse
voices within the structure. Discomfort manifests into what Shields (2004) describes as
pathologies of silence. If leaders want to transform education for all students within their
schools, understanding the pathologies of silence becomes critical to the anti-racism narrative.
Healing can begin by engaging in difficult conversations and creating safe spaces for educators
to engage in discussions without fear of reprisal (Bennett, 2019; Safir, 2017; Shields, 2004;
Stone et al., 2010).
In summary, disengagement from anti-racism education is complex. It is based on beliefs,
value systems and complicity. It is context-driven and can be challenged through emotional
investment and organizational support. Considering these factors are important, as they can
ultimately contribute to or confront the pathologies of silence.
Moving Forward to Initiate Change
The literature review yielded no research on successful programs for primary educators to
initiate change through anti-racism education within their classrooms. However, the literature
states that the value of representing cultural diversity and teaching its importance and value in
kindergarten is essential (York, 2016). Children come into the kindergarten classroom shaped by

20

their home cultures. Their kindergarten experiences have significant implications for later
academic, social, and emotional outcomes (York, 2016). However, early primary educators do
not seem well-prepared to provide an anti-racism education. There was ample literature on
disengagement of anti-racism education at all levels of education and preparing pre-service
teachers to educate classrooms with diverse learners. Thus, I offer the following research on
transformational professional development and practices that create systemic change as a starting
point to consider a plan to engage primary teachers in anti-racism education.
Transformational Professional Development for Anti-Racism Education
The literature does surface successful professional development and individual
interventions to facilitate teachers’ capacity in anti-racism education. McManimon and Casey
(2018) describe participants in a two-year professional development group learning about antiracism. The professional development was voluntary, had relational accountability emphasizing
collaborative relationships, and incorporated self-designed anti-racism interventions. Overall, the
educators experienced transformations in their thinking. The researchers recognized that many
professional development sessions for in-service educators are often “one-and-done” sessions
(McManimon & Casey, 2018). One-time, top-down professional development that is out of the
educators’ context often fails to nourish any ongoing anti-racism work, as noted in Vaught’s and
Castagno’s (2008) study discussed earlier. Failure to have educators chop at the roots of their
beliefs and values perpetuates defensive reactions that distance themselves as part of systemic
racism (Aveling, 2006).
Providing educators with sustained ongoing professional development could support
teachers in engaging in self-reflection and examining their beliefs and values. Bennett’s (2019)
case study demonstrates a successful intervention to support an in-service educator that held

21

ideologies centred in racial narratives. Bennett conducted four dialogic meetings with a preservice teacher to understand their perceptions of racism and then ten dialogic meetings with
them as an in-service teacher. Bennett’s research findings demonstrated that cultivating relational
trust allowed for difficult conversations to bring forth racial understanding. A significant amount
of research echoes the importance of building trust as a staple of entering critical discussions
with teachers to do the rigorous work involved in anti-racism (see Adams et al., 2019; Sharpe &
Nishimura, 2019; Nowell et al., 2017). Thus, building trust with the participants can be identified
as a supportive structure to engage in anti-racism education.
Understanding the dynamic nature of trust is essential, as educators may experience highrisk levels even within trusted relationships. Kaser and Halbert (2009) state that trust does not
always transfer from context to context and can easily be lost and hard to regain. Some theorists
state that risk and the emotional responses to risk are socially constructed (Twyford et al., 2017).
Thus, social interactions can either escalate or reduce the emotional reactions a person has to a
situation (Taylor-Gooby & Zinn, 2006). When teachers feel vulnerable, they may engage in
seeking reassurance, seeking help from trusted colleagues, preparing lessons more diligently, and
building their knowledge (Twyford et al., 2017). Finally, socio-constructivists also state that
positive emotions can enhance teachers’ risk-taking, especially when teachers know the risks
will improve their students’ learning (Twyford et al., 2017). As the participants engage in antiracism education, positive social interactions that value voice throughout the process can reduce
the risks they may experience. Lowering teachers’ risks may sustain their involvement in antiracism education.

22

Practice that Promotes Systemic Change
The limited research on transformational anti-racism professional development for
primary teachers meant this literature review was expanded to include general professional
development studies that might inform anti-racism work. In this section of the literature review, I
discuss practices that promote schools’ systemic changes. Moving away from “top-down”
initiatives, Butler and Schnellert (2012) conducted a case study of a complex community of
inquiry. One aspect of the research focused on how inquiry-orientated approaches to professional
development can impact systemic change. The research includes using a three-tier inquiry
framework consisting of (a) teacher learning-level inquiry, (b) practice-level inquiry, and (c)
student-level inquiry. The teacher learning level inquiry is described as self-regulated, involving
a cycle of planning, enacting learning strategies, monitoring, and revising approaches to achieve
set goals (Butler & Schnellert; 2012). Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) state that educators
withstand the journey of learning and implementing new ideas when they are supported through
an inquiry group of peers. Also, if teachers learn through practice-level inquiry, their
understanding may be heightened if they also focus on self-learning (Hargreaves, 1999;
McLaughlin et al., 2004, as cited in Butler & Schnellert, 2012). Thus, providing the participants
with a high level of autonomy and the ability to plan, enact, monitor and revise to achieve the
goal of engaging in anti-racism education may be a positive place to begin.
In addition to iterative collaboration cycles, the literature suggests that formal and
informal leadership plays a significant role in igniting systemic change in education. Safir (2017)
expands the conversations beyond collaborative inquiry work and discusses the importance of
leadership roles and institutional reorganization. She cautions leadership that they are “in charge
but not in control” (Safir, 2017, p.191). When leaders listen and respond to educators’ requests

23

for support and follow through on providing that support, it builds trust and relational capital
(Safir, 2017). Together, all stakeholders can re-organize the system where voice and choice are
accessible to students, families, and staff. The purpose of leadership is to influence the team with
enough guidance and options, then step back and allow the team to do the creative and powerful
work they are capable of doing. The focus can then be on generative dialogue to “find the answer
within the room” (Adams et al., 2019, p.1). To address system change, leadership in “context” is
explicitly essential to facilitate solutions from “within” to become a reality (Adams et al., 2019).
Summary
Understanding the broad context of racism helps to explain how it surfaces as socially
constructed beliefs and values traditionally held by a dominant group and hierarchical power
structures within education. Educators involving themselves in anti-racism work will benefit
from examining their identity in relation to the power structures and pushing against the system
to make changes. The system itself is long-standing and self-preserving, placing challenges on
teacher’s endeavours to engage in anti-racism work. However, offering educators a space to
engage in self-regulated, iterative collaborative inquiry and dialogue about their own racial
identity supports shifting their practice to engage with anti-racism education.
Methodology
In my research, I locate myself under the socio-constructivist paradigm. I take a firm
ontological stance that through dialogue and action, we can open our view of the world and coconstruct new ways of thinking and doing. To answer my research questions, (a) “How do early
primary educators situate themselves in anti-racism education?” and (b) “What systems do early
primary educators find supportive to engage in anti-racism education?” I need to gain a deep and
fulsome understanding of the participants’ lived experiences as they engage with anti-racism

24

pedagogy and curriculum. I embrace the epistemology that my direct connectedness to the
teachers who engage in the study will enhance my understanding of their experience. I position
myself within their work on co-constructing and implementing the unit, facilitating collaborative
and debriefing group sessions, and co-teaching in the classroom.
The method that best addresses my inquiry questions is a qualitative case study. A case
study involves an in-depth examination of a real-life situation, so the information’s essence is not
lost by time (Yin, 2014, as cited in Creswell & Poth, 2018). In this case, the research looks at the
lived experiences of kindergarten teachers collaborating and implementing an anti-racism unit. A
significant case study feature is that it is a bounded system, defined by time and by place (Stake,
2005, as cited in Creswell & Poth, 2018). The bounded case in this study was a group that
included three kindergarten teachers, Symone, Dena, and Sarah (pseudonyms), and Kate
(pseudonym), a part-time English language learner (ELL) teacher that works with the
kindergarten pod. I acted as a facilitator and participant-observer in the case study. My role was
to provide a purpose for our work together but not to prescribe how it was done. The participants
and I worked at the same school and have an established collaborative practice. The group and I
co-constructed and implemented an anti-racism unit over seven weeks.
A case study involves using multiple sources of information to gain a detailed
understanding of the case (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The data sources discussed in further detail
below included the unit-plan framework/lessons, weekly participant reflections, weekly
summary derived from the team debriefing/collaboration meetings, and the written transcripts
from the participants’ final individual interviews. The various data sources allowed for the
participants’ multiple perspectives and facilitated thick descriptions of their experiences
collaborating and implementing the anti-racism unit.

25

Context
The research setting described below provides the context for the group of four teachers,
who teach at the same school, located in the lower mainland of B.C. This context was chosen
because, in order to co-teach, I had to adhere to the COVID-19 protocols and remain with the
teaching pods I am assigned to for the school year.
Setting
The research took place in a kindergarten to grade five elementary school located in the
lower mainland of B.C. The school’s geographic location is in a matured residential area near the
city core, with apartment rentals, subsidized housing, and single-family dwellings. The diverse
population of the school is approximately two hundred and seventy students. The classroom
teachers implemented the anti-racism units in the kindergarten classes in this school.
Participants
Before recruiting participants for this study, the University of the Fraser Valley’s Human
Research Ethics Board (Appendix A: HREB Protocol No. 100540) and the local school district
granted consent to conduct this research. I recruited primary teachers and non-enrolling teachers
who worked with the primary teaching pods to participate in my research. The COVID-19
pandemic (Government of Canada, 2020) impacted how participants were recruited for this
research. Assigned teaching pods were a part of the school district’s safety protocols. Thus, the
participants would have to be within the same teaching pod to collaborate. Also, the participants
needed to be in a teaching pod that I was assigned to as a learning assistance teacher so we could
co-teach together. I sent out a letter of invitation through an email and chose the teaching pod
with the most participants that came forward. Once the participants showed interest in doing the

26

research, I pursued their informed consent through individual interviews. I provided each
participant with the opportunity to ask and answer any questions concerning the research.
The participants Dena, Sarah, Symone, and Kate, as shown in Table 1., are all female, of
White European descent, with a range of teaching experience. The four participants were
interested in learning about anti-racism education, and three participants had begun to engage in
self-education on racism. However, they all found it challenging to engage in conversations
about anti-racism with others. None of the participants had previously implemented explicit antiracism education in their classroom.

Table 1
Demographics of Teacher Participants

Demographics

Participants
Dena

Sarah

Symone

Kate

Self-Identity

White/European
Female

White/European
Female

White/European
Female

White/European
Female

Years of
Teaching

16 Years
kindergarten

3 Years
kindergarten

21 Years
kindergarten

9 Years
ELL teacher

Current
Engagement in
Anti-Racism
Dialogue and
Work

Open to learning, Open to learning,
has not engaged self-study
in conversation
conversations on
anti-racism
limited

Open to learning,
self-study
conversations on
anti-racism
limited

Open to learning,
self-study
conversations on
anti-racism
limited

Experience in
Teaching AntiRacism

None in teaching
anti-racism

None in teaching
anti-racism

Teaching grade 5
curriculum Addressing
students’
questions on
racialized social
issues

None in teaching
anti-racism

27

Research Methods
The research involved four specific steps: Step 1. Collaboration Before Teaching, Step 2.
Teaching the Anti-Racist Unit, Step 3. Team Debriefings and Collaboration, and Step 4. Final
Interviews. Each step is described in detail below.
Step 1 - Collaboration Before Teaching
The team, which also included me, met on January 13 and January 20, 2021, for
approximately two hours in total to co-plan the unit. The administrator provided permission to
utilize the weekly collaboration time. Thus, we could meet face-to-face, but socially distanced,
for the two collaboration sessions. At the first meeting, the group accepted the suggested norms,
and we agreed that it was a fluid document that could be revised as needed (Appendix B:
Debriefing Norms). Next, we decided on a meeting schedule including the final individual
interviews and co-constructed a fulsome definition of anti-racism pedagogy. The team had the
autonomy to determine if they wanted to (a) take a unit they were already working on and apply
anti-racism pedagogy or (b) create a new unit with an anti-racism focus. The participants decided
they wanted to co-construct and implement a unit on teaching their students explicitly about antiracism. None of the participants had ever taught an explicit anti-racism unit in kindergarten or
any grade.
In the second meeting, on January 20, I observed the participants were generating much
conversation around ideas for the anti-racism unit, but no concrete planning had been
established. Thus, we needed to work out a proposal to produce what the participants envisioned
within the case study time frame. One of the first considerations to accommodate was that the
participants had different teaching philosophies. A participant shared that she was “Reggio
Emilio” (Brown, 2019) trained, and she did not have experience in writing formal units. To

28

facilitate the participants’ teaching philosophies and their desire to implement a unit, I suggested
we develop a unit framework to start us off and then build lessons as we progressed. The team
agreed that it was a plan that worked for everyone.
Using a Universal Design for Learning model (Katz and Sokal, 2016) and Backwards
Design (Davis and Autin, 2020), we built the unit framework. Once the participants established
the outcome for all students, they established stepping-stones to arrive at the final destination. To
facilitate the team’s cohesiveness, I suggested we also co-construct definitions of essential
vocabulary taught in the unit. By the end of session two, the participants established the antiracism unit framework consisting of four main themes: 1. Community, 2. Diversity/Race, 3.
Racism/Anti-racism, and 4. Activism/Ally. We also established a fulsome definition of
community in kindergarten student language. The team discussed possibilities for the initial
lessons; I typed the ideas into formal lesson plans offering various resources and activities for the
teachers. The lesson plans were distributed to the participants via email before initiating the unit
the following week. Utilizing the lesson plans was optional. I sourced out anchor books for the
initial lessons. The participants co-constructed subsequent lesson plans after they began teaching
the unit.
Step 2 – Teaching the Anti-racism Unit.
The unit’s teaching commenced on January 22, 2021, and data collection continued until
February 27, 2021. The participants taught lessons each week at their own pace in response to
the students’ needs. Overall, the teachers taught lessons for the same theme within the same
week. As regular learning supports to the classrooms, Kate and I were available to co-teach the
lessons. I was available five days a week, and Kate was available on Wednesdays and Thursdays.
The participants were very receptive to co-teaching with us. The teachers led how they wanted

29

the co-teaching to happen. The co-teaching varied from scribing student’s responses while the
teacher taught, having one-on-one conferences with students after lessons, supporting activities
and art projects, or taking the lead role in teaching a class.
There was a variety of activities utilized to teach the unit. Many of the lessons
implemented thematic children’s books to help the children understand a concept. The books
were also a starting point to generate discussions with the students. To help the children
conceptualize the lessons’ main themes, the participants used several activities such as visuals,
videos, story workshop materials, maps of the students’ hearts, art projects with customized
paints to reflect their skin, and thematic bulletin boards.
Step 3 – Team Debriefings/Collaboration.
When the participants started teaching the unit, we met once a week for
debriefing/collaboration meetings. We met on January 27, February 3, February 10, February 18,
2021. Instead of having a debriefing/collaboration meeting in the final week of February, the
participants’ final interviews were conducted. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the afterschool
debriefing/collaboration meetings were online using the Zoom platform, as they were not part of
the regular workweek collaboration time. In the original research design, the meetings were
solely for debriefing the lessons because the unit was to be thoroughly planned before
commencing teaching. The goal was to have the debriefing sessions last thirty minutes to respect
the participants’ time. However, by participant request, the sessions ran for approximately 60
minutes. The sessions involved the participants debriefing the lessons they taught for the week
and then co-planning the lessons for the following week in the same session.
The debriefing/collaboration meetings had three distinct components. In the first part of
the meeting, the participants all took turns and shared what they taught that week, the resources

30

they used, and how the students responded. Kate and I also shared key observations we made
while co-teaching. After the participants shared out, I would casually highlight some strategies
the participants had shared that were exemplars of pedagogy that responded to students’ needs.
This practice generated conversations with the team. The participants embraced this practice and
started to ask each other questions about strategies that appealed to them. If a participant
mentioned a barrier they were facing in the classroom, I asked what would support them to
achieve the desired results. Often these questions generated discussion on how the co-teaching
could accommodate the needs in the classroom.
In the second portion of the meeting, after the participants debriefed the lessons, they
taught that week, and I asked them how they would like to move forward for the following week.
The teachers utilized the information they had learned from each other and reflected on their
students’ responses to formulate the following week’s lessons. The participants and I brought an
assortment of thematic books and other resources to share with the team to support the
collaborative co-planning. After the sessions, I wrote up and emailed out formal lesson plans
based on our discussions to use the following week.
Finally, after the share-outs and collaborative planning, the conversations evolved into
deep anti-racism discussions in the third portion of the meeting. The participants engaged in
discussions about their revelations and how their learning supported their teaching in the
classroom.
Step 4 – Final Interviews.
The final part of the case study was individual interviews involving open-ended
questions. (Appendix C: Interview Protocol and Questions). Due to the COVID-19 pandemic,
the interviews were online using the ZOOM platform. I provided the participants with the

31

questions a few days before our scheduled interview to provide them ample time to think about
and prepare their responses. I informed the participants that it was acceptable to go over their
debriefing reflections. Each participant could go back to any questions during the interview to
expand upon their answer. I audio-recorded the interviews using the Otter application. Each of
the interviews lasted approximately sixty minutes for three participants and about forty minutes
for one participant.
Managing Bias
As the principal researcher of this study, I have made several intentional actions to
manage my own bias. Miles et al. (2019) reminds researchers that while there is no single reality,
the researcher has the responsibility of ensuring their research is trustworthy. In this section, I
discuss three ways I have attended to the trustworthiness of this study.
Triangulation
A significant feature of the case study method is that several data sources are collected.
The multiple data sources (described in detail in the section below), consisting of the lesson/unit
plans, the participant debriefing /collaboration written reflections, the debriefing/collaboration
notes, and the transcripts from the final interviews, allowed for several perspectives from each
participant. The data’s intersection provided for a layered analysis of the participants’ lived
experiences. In essence, instead of a one-dimensional view, there became a multi-dimensional
view and a deeper understanding of their truths (Miles et al., 2019).
Member Checks
I wanted to ensure that the data I analyzed reflected what the participants experienced and
shared. A member check allows the participants to review the debriefing/collaboration notes and
interview transcripts to decide if they wanted to make any additions, omissions, or revisions to

32

the documents. Thus, I had the participants member check all the debriefing notes and the final
interview transcripts. Throughout the data collection, I was vigilant, particularly in the debriefing
sessions and the final interviews, to have the participants clarify what they meant rather than me
assuming what they meant. Two members made additions that they forgot to share in their final
interviews.
Expert Reader
Dr. Nikki Yee, my research supervisor, was invaluable to me. As my mentor throughout
the entire research process, we met regularly, and she asked me provocative questions. In
articulating my answers, I became more accountable to my own beliefs and values to open my
thinking. Furthermore, she helped me evaluate my coding by challenging me to rationalize my
coding choices. She also offered her expert insights to make the coding more concise. In
addition, Dr. Joanna Sheppard provided her perspectives as a second reader for the written report
and provided her insights and feedback.
Data Sources and Analysis
Four sources of data were collected in the case study for data analysis. The written
transcripts from the individual interviews were the primary data source. The unit lesson plans,
weekly participant reflections, and the detailed notes generated from the weekly online team
debriefing/collaboration meetings provided context to the individual interviews. I selected a
holistic thematic coding analysis described by Saldaña (2009) and Nowell et al. (2017) to review
all the data as I received it initially. The familiarity of the data allowed me to organize and crossreference it to the final interviews. I used a more in-depth analysis of the final interviews, which
is described below.

33

Unit Framework-Lesson Plans
The first source of data received was the unit framework and the unit plans. I organized
the lesson plans in chronological order into a three-ring binder. On an excel spreadsheet with a
column for each enrolling classroom teacher, I noted the lessons, along with the resources,
activities, and any significant changes, omissions, or additions to the lessons that each participant
made. I also noted when Kate or I co-taught in the classrooms.
Participant Weekly Debriefing/Collaboration Reflections
It was optional for the participants to complete a reflection after each
debriefing/collaboration meeting. I provided the participants with a reflection template
(Appendix D: Reflection Template). Despite being optional, I received all reflections, some were
late, and one participant missed a week. I printed the reflections and chronologically placed them
for each participant in the same binder separated by a divider. Once I received the reflections, I
conducted a holistic thematic coding analysis described by Saldaña (2009) and Nowell et al.
(2017). On an excel spreadsheet with a column for each participant, I entered their key themes. I
colour-coded common themes of all four participants and bolded interesting or pivotal themes
for each participant that did not fall under the collective theme.
Debriefing Notes
I wrote up notes after each debriefing/collaboration meeting. Then I shared them with the
participants within 24 hours of the meeting. They could member check the
debriefing/collaboration notes and have them for their records. The participants could email back
any revisions, omissions, or additions before the subsequent debriefing/collaboration meetings.
No participants made any revisions to the debriefing/collaboration notes. I chronologically
organized the member-checked debriefing/collaboration notes into a third section of the binder. I

34

conducted a holistic thematic coding analysis described by Saldaña (2009) and Nowell et al.
(2017). On an excel spreadsheet, I created a column for each session and entered the prominent
themes. I observed the trends each week and colour-coded themes at the end of the data
collection.
Final Interview
The last data source was the individual interviews. The audio recordings of the interviews
were made into text transcripts by the Otter application. The participants did a member check of
their transcripts. I requested that the member checks be completed in seven days. If they did not
offer me any feedback, after seven days, I presumed that they accepted the original transcript,
and I prepared the analysis. (Appendix E: Timeline of the Events).
Once the transcripts were member-checked, I did a holistic thematic analysis described
by Saldaña (2009) and Nowell et al. (2017) of each interview. I then did descriptive coding with
sub-coding. Through discussion with my Supervisor, Dr. Nikki Yee, I reflected on my literature
review in relation to my codes. I decided to refine and re-organize my analysis by engaging in
process coding (Saldaña, 2009). Through process coding, I identified the gerunds the participants
highlighted to dismantle the pathologies of silence.
Collective Data
After I had the final interviews coded, I arranged all of the data chronologically for each
week. Organizing the collective data allowed me to supplement the final interviews’ processing
codes with rich context and thick descriptions. My interactions throughout the planning and coconstruction of the unit permitted me to gain a clear insight into the participants’ lived
experiences. Engaging with the data sources through the research allowed me to keep it
organized and facilitated an ongoing analysis.

35

Results
I welcome you to acknowledge with me the dedicated work of the four participant
teachers. Each participant bravely decided to teach anti-racism to five- and six-year-olds for the
first time during the year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Their actions and voice have created these
research results, and I am honoured to share their experiences. To answer the first inquiry
question, “How do early primary educators situate themselves in anti-racism education?” I first
discuss the participants’ experiences with anti-racism. I then include the participants’ statements
demonstrating how they situated themselves within anti-racism work before and after
participating in this research. It is important to share where the participants situate themselves
within anti-racism education to understand their lived experience and how it connects to current
literature on anti-racism. Most importantly, it helps to learn if and what support systems benefit
teachers in anti-racism education.
To answer the second inquiry question, “What systems do early primary educators find
supportive to engage in anti-racism education?” the remainder of the results section will focus on
the three supportive systems, (a) co-planning, (b) co-construction of knowledge, and (c) coteaching. The participants recognized these three support systems as foundational for them to
become emergent anti-racism educators. It is noteworthy that all three support systems involved
working collaboratively with one another. The systems are discussed in sequential order
according to when they initially happened in the research. However, as the study progressed, the
support systems were happening simultaneously with no overall prioritized importance.
Research Question One: Pre-Collaboration and Implementation of the Unit
This section will discuss the participants’ experiences with anti-racism and anti-racism
education before engaging in this study to answer the first research question, “How do early

36

primary educators situate themselves in anti-racism education?”. During the final interviews, the
participants expressed they were interested in learning more about anti-racism education before
becoming participants in the case study. Racialized events in the United States were significant
catalysts for three participants to engage in deeper personal learning about anti-racism (Canadian
Broadcast Corporation, 2020). Kate, the current ELL teacher, who taught grade five last year,
shared her experiences, “In June, what was going on in the States was the first push to get me out
of my comfort zone … I decided I needed to keep learning and to better myself” (FI Kate). Sarah
echoed that racialized events in the States raised her awareness, “The whole Black Lives Matter
was the push that made me read a lot more … I am actively trying to be anti-racist in my
practice” (FI Sarah). The racialized events brought Symone to a realization that she needed to
learn more, “The events of last spring in America was the fuel for my attention that we need to
do better … I just wanted to know more, so I can do better” (FI Symone). It was interesting to
hear how they each reflected on the racialized events of last spring and that they needed to learn
more to be part of the solution to racism. The broad social context clearly played a role in the
educators’ emergent understandings of themselves in relation to anti-racism.
The three participants stated they engaged in self-learning to broaden their lens and learn
about Black and Indigenous lived experiences. Kate, Symone, and Sarah shared that they read
books featuring BIPOC authors (FI Kate; FI Sarah; FI Symone). Kate also expressed how she
opened her lens to following BIPOC on social media, not just professionally but also in her
personal life, to bring a broader scope to her interests. “I was following various teachers on
Instagram and even in other areas of my life. I made an initiative to follow Black ceramicist and
to follow Black cooks” (FI Kate). Despite initiating their self-directed learning, the participants
expressed apprehension and challenges engaging in critical conversations with others involving

37

anti-racism. “It did not feel easy to bring up with anyone; it did not feel accessible to have the
conversations” (FI Symone). Often the participants expressed a fear of “saying the wrong thing”
when they wanted to engage in conversations about anti-racism (FI Dena). Symone added that
she tended to “overthink things,” inhibiting her from initiating conversations (FI Symone). When
Kate engaged in discussions, she stated how she found it challenging when “people had their
walls up” (FI Kate). Thus, engaging in learning about anti-racism was not providing them with
the tools to engage in conversations with others about anti-racism, nor had it provoked them to
engage in anti-racism education. Thus, before our work together, the educators situated
themselves in the racial narrative as observers and consumers of knowledge but struggled to
engage as active agents of change.
Research Question One: Post-Collaboration and Implementation of the Unit
After the seven weeks of working together, the four participants shared their newly
discovered empowerment through collaborating and implementing the anti-racism unit. Dena
reflected on her experience, “I learned where to start with this huge topic and that I could start
with something little. Before, I thought this was unapproachable” (FI Dena). Feeling the
confidence to engage in conversations was a common sentiment of the team. “The biggest
growth for me, if someone were to do something in the school, I could say something about it”
(FI Sarah). For Symone and Kate, the collective experience provoked excitement in their
teaching and learning. Symone explained how she felt like an agent of change in her classroom,
“It has brought me so much joy, and it has made me so excited for teaching. I feel I am making a
significant difference by teaching the children each and every one of them is important and
needed” (FI Symone). “I just loved the whole experience. It just spurred that piece that had been
growing in me since June [2020]. This is what we need more of” (FI Kate). “I would love to see

38

this continue next year in some form” (FI Kate). Dena also expressed, “It would be nice to see if
other teachers in the school would like to take on this work with us” (FI Dena). The participants
became so committed to the anti-racism work that they wanted to continue with our
collaborations and involve other teachers. Thus, the teachers recognized that they experienced a
transformation in themselves and their practice. After participating in the collaboration and
implementation of the unit, they now situated themselves as active agents of change in the racial
narrative.
Research Question Two: Responsive Co-Planning
In this section, I address my second research question, “What systems do early primary
educators teachers find supportive to engage in anti-racism education?” The first supportive
system that the participants identified was the responsive co-planning of the unit. Utilizing the
participants’ responses in the final interviews, I defined co-planning as a group of teachers
contributing ideas and resources to work towards a common goal. Likewise, I built from the
group’s responses to define ‘responsive’ as positioning the teachers’ and student’s needs as a
priority through universal design to foster inclusion. Responsive co-planning was the main focus
of the first two planning sessions, and it continued as a portion of the four
debriefing/collaboration meetings. There are three sub-themes within responsive co-planning:
differentiating planning styles, providing resources, and working together to provide a sense of
safety to the participants as they developed a potentially controversial unit.
Differentiating According to Planning Styles
For the four participants and myself, coming together to co-plan meant having to navigate
different planning styles. Two participants emphasized the importance of their teaching styles,
philosophies, and entry levels into anti-racism education being validated during the planning

39

process. Sarah was vocal in the second collaboration meeting (CM2 January 27) and the final
interview, “I have never formally planned a unit; it is not how I was trained” (FI Sarah).
Honouring Sarah’s “Reggio Emilia informed practice” (FI Sarah) was vital to maintaining her
active participation. “If this [unit] were prescribed, my engagement would have disappeared” (FI
Sarah). Whereas Dena, newer to anti-racism education, was appreciative of more guidance, “I
liked having the lessons because then I knew I would be ok” (FI Dena). The responsive coplanning accommodated both participants. For Dena, it supported her in finding an entry point
into anti-racism education (FI Dena) and made it “comfortable and easy to do hard work” (FI
Dena). Sarah described the co-planning as “non-judgmental and safe,” providing her with a sense
of agency (FI Sarah). Providing responsive co-planning from the onset of the process provided
the participants with individualized entry points into anti-racism education. More importantly,
they identified that having their voice validated supported their engagement with anti-racism
education.
Providing Resources
The participants appreciated having salient resources readily available with collaborative
discussions on incorporating the resources into their lessons. Also, they were excited to see the
plethora of excellent children’s books made available to them. Many of the books could be used
successfully with kindergarten students and broad enough in context to engage grade five
students in conversation. The participants could choose the books that worked best within their
classrooms. For example, Symone noted, “The books you sourced were so helpful; there were so
many good books” (FI Symone). Kate said she could also use the same books for her grade five
class next year, “I felt a lot of the books that were selected were powerful at conveying important
messages to the kids and great for higher grades too” (FI Kate). Sarah shared how the team’s

40

conversation expanded her ideas of what she could do in her classroom, “I was always excited
we would discuss the resources and decide how to fit them in” (FI Sarah). Over our time
together, the group collectively gathered many excellent resources, which enabled the teachers to
have various options they could choose from to best fit their students’ needs. Also, providing the
resources saved the teachers' valuable time required to source out viable resources. During the
collaboration, discussions on implementing and utilizing the resources provided the teachers with
ideas beyond their own. The sharing of ideas supported their ability to engage with anti-racism
education.
Together We Can
The participants articulated a sense of safety and support in co-planning the unit, and it
freed them to take new risks and engage in anti-racism education. Sarah discussed how she knew
some of the terminology used might be considered controversial but fleshing it out together as a
team in kindergarten-appropriate language was reassuring. “There is power in knowing that what
I am going to do and say in my classroom is being similarly done in two other classrooms. I can
use the words racism, anti-racism, and ally, and it is not me on an island by myself” (FI Sarah).
Dena emphasized how the responsive co-planning process was invaluable for her, particularly
developing the unit vocabulary definitions. “I thought, oh those are big words … I could not
imagine planning this by myself, not without talking to other teachers or discussing things” (FI
Dena). The responsive co-planning process motivated Symone to “just try” as she tends to
“overthink things … it was so supportive to have people trying this with me for the first time”
(FI Symone). The responsive co-planning provided an assurance check that the content they
taught was appropriate for kindergarten children and reduced their anxiety about their level of
expertise in anti-racism education before starting teaching anti-racism.

41

All participants expressed how instrumental it was for them to support one another to
initiate new practice, which they struggled to do independently. Individually they had the desire
and were motivated to engage in antiracism education, but collectively they became the
supportive system to engage actively.
Research Question Two: Co-construction of Knowledge
The second support system that the participants discussed in the final interviews was the
co-construction of knowledge. Utilizing the participants' responses in the final interviews, I
define co-construction of knowledge as a group of teachers enhancing their understanding of
anti-racism by engaging in dialogue and sharing lived experiences. As a result, the participants
felt motivated to engage in their world in new ways. While we were co-constructing knowledge
throughout the entire research process, it was particularly prominent during the four
debriefing/collaboration meetings. In this theme, the participants discussed how trust provided
the confidence to ask critical questions to learn from one another.
Trust Provides Confidence to ask Critical Questions
Through trust, the participants allowed themselves to ask critical questions that enhanced
their understanding of racism and other related terms commonly used in anti-racism work but
perhaps are not always explicitly stated. By the end of the debriefing/collaborative session held
on January 27, 2021, the dialogue evolved into a generative space where the participants began
to obtain a sense of trust that elevated their engagement in the co-construction of knowledge
about anti-racism. Dena reflected that she felt safe to share and learn from the other participants,
“Safety within the group enhanced my learning from the other teachers; it just felt safe to ask
questions” (FI Dena). Symone shared how she often does not ask questions in large group
professional development settings because often, she feels she should know the answer. “It is

42

vulnerable to not know something in front of others … I felt comfortable to ask questions and
even contribute what I know” (FI Symone). Sarah observed the group dynamic as nonjudgemental and, as a result, she felt supported in her learning. “Someone was always willing to
talk through things and go back and forth, and it never felt judgmental. This is exactly how I
learn. I learn with conversations” (FI Sarah). The sense of trust and non-judgement was the
foundation for asking questions and sharing their understandings.
Once the team began to ask critical questions, the dialogue on anti-racism and related
topics started to flow naturally from the participants. We all gained a deeper understanding of
some theoretical anti-racism definitions during the debriefing/collaborative meetings (DCM 1-4,
January 27; February 2; February 10; February 18, 2021). Symone recalled a conversation where
the team helped her reach a fulsome understanding of othering. To summarize our discussion, we
viewed othering as the act of exclusion or marginalization based on having identities different
from the dominant group, emphasizing division, with the intent to see the dominant groups as
better. We also discussed how it could show up as ignoring ideas, opinions, exclusion and
avoidance of diversity (DCM February 2). “The discussion about othering, it was a term that
came up in my readings, and I heard it when we talked about equity and anti-racism, but I did not
fully understand it” (FI Symone). All of the group members participated in the conversation that
led to a “richer understanding of the term for everyone” (FI Kate). Sarah reflected that “There
was so much power in multiple voices to tackle complex topics. We were a team, and we all
brought different things to enrich the conversations. There was such power in that” (FI Sarah).
The group discussions expanded into “topics such as intersectionality” (FI Symone). The
group discussion was complex, but it involved defining intersectionality as the simultaneous
sections of a person’s identity, including but not limited to race, class, gender, sexuality, and

43

nationality. For example, a Black, lesbian, cis-gender female born in Canada that is neuro-typical
with acute anxiety is a holistic being with race, gender, sexuality, and mental health identities
happening simultaneously. To support one section of her identity, such as race, is to accept all
sections of her identity (DCM February 2). Symone shared, “I had heard you [researcher] use the
term [intersectionality] before, and I was pretty sure I knew what it meant (F1 Symone).
However, through the collaborative discussions, she gained new knowledge and stated, “I could
not talk about any of this before, and now I feel I can” (FI Symone). Kate reflected, “It was
powerful to sit down and have discussions with the other staff and to hash out the ideas of antiracism and decolonization” (FI Kate). Co-constructing their knowledge facilitated their ability to
understand the importance of anti-racism education, not only for the students but also for
themselves. Discussing current topics in the anti-racism narrative provided the participants with
the confidence to engage others in anti-racism dialogue.
Research Question Two: Responsive Co-Teaching
The final supportive system identified in the analysis was responsive co-teaching of the
unit. Utilizing the participants' responses in the final interviews, I define co-teaching as two or
more educators teaching together in a shared space to reach a common objective. Co-teaching
becomes responsive when the lead classroom teachers’ needs are a priority, and they are
addressed by the collaborative team and facilitated through co-teaching. The teachers identified
having a co-teacher observe and scribe students’ responses, multiple teacher perspectives, and
celebrating pivotal teaching moments as supportive during the co-teaching.
Co-teacher Observing and Scribing Students’ Responses
As educators are multi-tasking in busy kindergarten classrooms, the teacher can miss
important things that children say. In the first debriefing/collaboration meeting (January 27,

44

2021), Sarah expressed an interest in having a co-teacher scribing what the students said during
her lessons. “Many times, my brain is on classroom management, and I am missing the amazing
things the kids are saying” (FI Sarah). As a result, Kate and I would script the student responses
when the participants were teaching. During the debriefing/collaborative meetings, direct student
quotes were shared with the participants (DCM 1- 4, January 27; February 3; February 10;
February 18, 2021). “Later in the debriefings, when you [researcher] or Kate would share what
the kids said, I would be like, oh my goodness, that is so important” (FI Sarah). Symone also
expressed how valuable it was to hear student responses, “It has been so nice to have other
people listen to what they [students] are saying … I have appreciated that for our planning and
for being responsive to the kids” (FI Symone). The participants found responsive co-teaching as
a supportive system for them to engage with anti-racism education. They were able to gain
greater insight into their students, which allowed them to be responsive to their student’s needs
in planning and teaching about anti-racism.
Multiple Perspectives in the Classroom
The responsive co-teaching brought multiple perspectives into the classrooms, which was
invaluable to some of the participants. Symone stated, “Teaching anti-racism to kindergarten was
100 times more valuable having four caring adults in here teaching with me. I had you
[researcher] and Kate in the classroom with me, but also had Dena and Sarah in here through our
collaborations” (FI Symone). Simone explained that she pulled from the experiences shared by
Sarah and Dena with her into the classroom, and it provided her with a broader range of options
to support the children’s learning about anti-racism (FI Simone).
When co-teaching, the participants and I would consult on how the children responded to
the lesson. We shared the consultations in the debriefing/collaboration meetings, and the entire

45

team benefited from hearing about each other’s experiences. It opened windows into the other
classrooms, and as a result, we all learned from the shared experiences. The teachers
incorporated other teacher’s ideas into their lessons (DCM 1- 4, January 27; February 3;
February 10; February 18, 2021). As Sarah shared, “It was just so important and powerful to hear
what was being said in other classrooms … often, we teach in our own bubble and do not always
see what others are doing” (FI Sarah). Teaching something new and seeing how other teachers
approached the content allowed the participants to expand their practice. Finally, Dena shared,
“Watching the lessons when you [researcher] came in and read the book with the kids was so
helpful because I saw another way to approach the lesson” (FI Dena). There are various ways
teachers can support one another with their approaches. It is helpful for teachers to explore
different ways to see teaching in action to increase their capacity.
Experiencing Student Responses Together
The responsive co-teaching facilitated a sharing of joy between us as educators as we
jointly shared student learning. Celebrating student learning provided the participants with
feedback that helped them gain confidence in the classroom as anti-racism educators (DCM 2-4
February 3; February 10; February 18, 2021). While teaching a lesson, Symone wanted the
students to understand that we are all vital parts of a community. While reading the book, All are
Welcome (Penfold, 2018), she stopped and said to each student, “[Student name], You belong
here” (R1 Symone February 3, 2021). In Symone’s reflection, she described this lesson with the
students, “[When] I emphasized the word “you,” each child sat a little straighter and smiled back
adoringly” (R1 Symone February 3, 2021). Observing this lesson in the classroom with Symone,
this lesson became a pivotal and celebrated conversation. It reinforced the importance of seeing
each child as significant and valued, but jointly witnessing the children’s reactions prompted an

46

excellent discussion. (DCM1 January 27th, 2021). In her final interview, Symone reflected on
this moment with a huge smile on her face, “The kids leaned in like they were getting a piece of
candy as I said their name” (FI Symone).
Another example of a significant shared experience is when I co-taught in Dena’s class. I
shared some visuals on a community with diverse representation. One of the students “leaped
forward and grabbed a picture and said, “He looks just like me!”” (F1 Dena). This generated
discussions and later reflections for Dena on “how important representation is in the classroom”
(R1 Dena, January 27th, 2021). When Kate expressed, “How many kindergarten classes are
talking about this right now in the school district? It was really exciting to see the term antiracism brought up in the kindergarten class. And the students were so open to the learning” (F1
Kate). The co-teaching provided validation on two levels. It witnessed excellent anti-racism
pedagogy exhibited by the teachers, building their confidence in a new practice. Also, it offered
verification to the interpretations of creating pivotal experiences for the students when both
teachers would turn to each other with that knowing smile. The more teachers witnessing and
celebrating the students’ learning, means higher engagement of the critical work we are doing.
In conclusion, the participants described several supportive systems to enter into the
controversial practice of anti-racism education. To develop proficiency in the new approach, they
relied on one another's support to reduce the risk and gain confidence in their anti-racism
journey. We co-planned, co-constructed knowledge and co-taught, and enacted practices
previously perceived out of reach through the collective experience. While doing hard work, the
participants realized they did not have to know all of the answers to initiate anti-racism education
in their classroom because they were on a continuum of their learning. Also, witnessing the

47

positive impact it was having on their students motivated their anti-racism work. Both the
teachers and the students were positively impacted by initiating the anti-racism education.
Discussion
The purpose of this research was to gain insights into how early primary educators can
engage with anti-racism education. Specifically, the research questions are: (a) “How do early
primary educators situate themselves in anti-racism education?” and (b) “What systems do early
primary educators find supportive to engage in anti-racism education?” Analysis of the data
included holistic thematic, descriptive, and process coding, which provided the research results.
In response to the first research question, the results indicated that the four teacher
participants were open to anti-racism education before the research. They were involved in selfdirected learning to varying degrees but had not engaged actively in dialogue or anti-racism
education. Through participation in the case study, all four participants stated that they
experienced a transformation in their practice and gained new confidence to continue anti-racism
education in their classrooms.
In response to the second research question, the analysis identified three themes that
assisted the participants to become emergent anti-racism educators: (a) responsive co-planning,
(b) co-construction of knowledge, and (c) responsive co-teaching. The discussions, conclusions,
and implications are drawn from the results of the data analysis in this study. The discussion
focuses on the importance of listening to educators to facilitate their needs and offering
generative processes embedded in responsive pedagogy to build relational trust.
Research Question One: Listening to Understand Educator’s Readiness
As educators demonstrate they wish to engage in anti-racism education, it is helpful when
leaders listen to teachers' needs to fully understand and provide the essential tools they require to

48

support their journey. I was delighted with the findings that all of the participants were open, and
some were eager to engage and learn more about anti-racism education. Not only were they keen
to learn more, but they had also started the journey of their self-directed learning. These findings
are inconsistent with several anti-racism scholars as they describe systemic racism as ordinary,
enduring, and who suggest that White people often do not examine their own racial identities
(Delgado & Stefanic, 2017; DiAngelo, 2017; Egbo, 2009; Saad, 2020; Vaught and Castagno,
2008). This finding could imply that research does not adequately account for White people who
are motivated but unsure how to navigate anti-racism education, particularly educators in the
early primary school years.
I was intrigued by the research results that suggested the participants, before the
research, started to unpack their privilege by reading Black and Indigenous authors and
following various anti-racism educators on social media. The participants' reactions responded to
the amplified anti-racism activists' voices on the national and international stage due to recent
racialized events (CBC News, 2020). The participants were delving into understanding their
privilege as it correlated to their understanding of anti-racism. Again, this contravened the
writings of several anti-racism scholars who posit that White people subconsciously perpetuate
their privilege, as described by McIntosh (1988), and the lack of acknowledgment often
translates to a failure to understand systemic racism (DiAngelo 2018; Knowles & Hawkman
2020; Mosley 2010; Ullucci, 2012). The findings suggest that White educators are motivated to
examine their privilege to engage in anti-racism education when they realize their racial identity
plays a significant role in the classroom. The current literature appears to underestimate the
desire for educators to reach across differences and actively engage in change, given the right

49

social context. Again, the results provide evidence that educators with wonderful intentions may
require support to translate theory into practice through collaborative inquiry.
Interestingly, the results are consistent with discussions on the hidden curriculum
(Bennett & LeCompte, 1995; Tator, 2006, as cited in Egbo, 2009). Although the participants
were involved in self-directed education on anti-racism, they had not yet made significant shifts
in their teaching practices. They all stated that they had not engaged in teaching anti-racism
education and acknowledged that they often taught through the lens of dominant ideologies. As
Dei (1996) states, anti-racism education is activism. The results imply that learning about antiracism is perhaps not enough to provoke teachers to activate anti-racism education. However,
when leadership offers educators tools, such as collaborative inquiry, it may be the supportive
environment that some educators need to take the next steps to engage actively in anti-racism
education.
Furthermore, critically examining the pathologies of silence is invaluable to this
discussion. The findings that the participants' lack of engagement in dialogue with others and
anti-racism education in the classroom aligns with DiAngelo's (2018) work. She states that often
individuals fear speaking up about racism, as it positions the individual as combative or
humourless. They run the risk of damaging their social collateral. During our collaborative
inquiry groups, all participants mentioned how bringing up racism was difficult for them for this
reason. However, having the safety of the group made it possible for them to participate in
discussions on racism.
In addition, the participants said that they just felt they didn’t know enough to engage in
the conversation about anti-racism with confidence as they were still navigating through their
understandings. The research results did not entirely align with the author, Saad (2020) when she

50

stated that White people remain silent because they are self-preserving their privilege. The
participants were silent not because they were complacent with the status quo; they were silent
because they had not developed a strong enough voice to convincingly articulate themselves in a
critical but complex conversation. Opening up awareness of why people are not engaging in the
conversation may remove racialized labelling and encourage creative ways to engage in
dialogue. Finding like-minded educators that want to take a stance against racism to engage in
anti-racism dialogue allows educators to find their voice. Additionally, uniting with the voice of
others reduces the risk of been seen as a lone antagonist. Instead, the collective voice can become
the protagonist providing a critical narrative to anti-racism work.
In conclusion, the results indicate that primary educators are interested in engaging in
anti-racism education. However, locating entry points to situate themselves in anti-racism
education is challenging when working in isolation. After being involved in the case study, all
participants stated they now situate themselves into the anti-racism narrative. As Safir (2017)
discusses, actively listening to educators’ needs and providing access to the tools they require
sets them up to do the great things they can do. If there is an awareness that educators are ready
to engage in anti-racism education but require support, then listening carefully to their needs is
the next step. Thus, leadership can work with their school teams to extend beyond polarized
dichotomies of good-bad, racism - anti-racism to fully understand the progression required of
educators to reach anti-racism objectives and address the pathologies of silence within their
schools.
Research Question Two: Generative Possibilities
In response to research question two, the research's findings offer several explanations as
to why collaborative inquiry can offer generative possibilities for kindergarten (and early

51

primary) teachers to engage in anti-racism education. At the onset of this research, I thought
district-wide professional development sessions would be the answer to support teachers to
engage in anti-racism education. However, the findings of this research have shifted my
understandings and clarified an answer for me.
The study's results agree with current research on how collaborative inquiry supports
teachers’ professional development. Particularly when the inquiry groups are voluntary, selfregulated with a high level of autonomy, have relational accountability, and extend over a
duration of time (McManimon & Casey 2018; Butler & Schnellert 2012). The findings also
agree with Hargreaves (1999), who notes that when teachers are involved in self-directed
learning, it will also support the benefits of collaborative inquiry. However, the research's results
also situate well within Adams et al.’s (2019) discussions on “finding the answer within the
room” (p.1). Utilizing teachers' contextual understanding and providing frameworks for
generative dialogue can initiate robust systemic changes within schools (Adams et al., 2019).
The research results indicate that dialogue and enacting our collective learning yielded positive
engagement into anti-racism education through our collaborative inquiry.
Butler and Schnellert’s (2012) framework explains how the participants engaged in an
iterative cycle of planning, enacting strategies, monitoring, and revising. The findings suggest
that the iterative collaborative cycles shifted the participants from passive anti-racism learning to
active anti-racism education (Dei, 1996) by interweaving three supportive processes: responsive
co-planning, co-construction of knowledge, and responsive co-teaching. The results also aligned
with McManimon and Casey's (2018) research placing importance on the inquiry community’s
connection and relational accountability. Each of the processes, described as necessary by the
participants, focused on our joint collaborative efforts. The collaborative processes removed

52

significant risks of engaging in anti-racism education, which aligns with Twyford et al.’s (2017)
and Taylor-Gooby and Zinn’s (2006) research on teacher vulnerability. The iterative cycle,
embedded with trust, provided a supportive system for the participants to be vulnerable, ask
questions, and gain new knowledge.
The findings also demonstrated that the participants found great value in voice and choice
(Safir, 2017; Adams et al., 2019), layered through the research’s processes, ultimately building
invaluable trust amongst the team. (see Adams et al., 2019; Sharpe & Nishimura, 2017; Nowell
et al., 2017). In summary, safe spaces and protected time to engage in iterative collaborative
inquiry are supportive systems to allow teachers to engage in anti-racism education.
Research Question Two: Responsive Pedagogy Builds Trust
While providing educators opportunities to engage in dialogue and iterative cycles of
collaboration, leadership must be mindful of the risks teachers are taking. Therefore, when
leaders respond to educators' requests for support to engage in high-risk pedagogy, it can reduce
the risk for the educator. The responsiveness is also an opportunity to build collegial trust, a vital
component for systemic change (Safir, 2017; Sharpe & Nishimura, 2017). The research results
also align with Kaser and Halbert’s (2009) work on trust, validating that trust is dynamic and
does not always transfer from context to context. Even though the participants knew each other
well and had a strong level of trust prior to the research, it was essential to ensure the trust was
transferred to our work together on anti-racism. Trust was established in different ways and from
the onset of the research. Differentiating the planning for the various participants established
their voice was centred in our work together, which gained trust from the participants (Safir,
2017; Twyford et al., 2017).

53

The findings indicated another layer of trust was established when the participants valued
having autonomy in how the co-teaching was implemented. Responding to the participant's
request for co-teaching support was a further opportunity to build trust between colleagues,
consistent with the literature (Safir 2017; Twyford et al., 2017). Previous researchers have also
established that positive social interactions can sustain teachers’ commitment to new practices
with high-risk levels (Taylor-Gooby & Zinn, 2006). For example, the results indicated that
sharing with teachers in joyful learning experiences of the students and celebrating the
importance of their critical work impacted the teachers significantly.
Also, the research results indicate that the overall trust established within the group led
to the group’s vulnerability to ask questions that allowed for collaborative discussions and a
richer understanding of personal and teacher identities. Anti-racism scholars state that the
interrogation of identity is critical for White educators to engage in anti-racism education (Dei,
1996; Egbo, 2009). Getting to a level of trust where educators can be vulnerable to state what
they do not know and do not understand is critical. One participant stated that she had not found
this level of vulnerability in large professional development settings. This statement is evidence
of why large professional development may not be successful in supporting teacher’s
transformation of thinking (Alaca & Ryle, 2018; Parhar & Sensoy, 2011; Vaught & Castagno,
2008).
Furthermore, the findings challenge Matias and Mackey’s (2016) premise that teachers
are required to gain emotional literacy to engage and sustain their activism in anti-racism
education. In essence, this belief is positing that emotional literacy will develop in a vacuum.
The findings in this research imply that the participants required the reciprocal engagement
between learning together and then taking the pedagogy into the classroom to experience the

54

benefits of anti-racism education. One participant stated that she was thankful for encouragement
to “ just try” because she had not felt so much joy and excitement in her teaching in a long time.
In alignment with Indigenous scholar Dwayne Donald's (2016) work, she created diversity
lessons for the children to understand that diversity is the strength of their learning community.
Seeing every child as a valuable contributor allowed her to receive her students through a
strengths-based lens. She intentionally communicated the value to each child. The children’s
joyful responses provided her with validation of her investment into anti-racism education. These
findings align with prominent researchers in anti-racism education that emancipating students
from structures that resist diversity is effective education that does something for children (Dei,
2014; Egbo, 2009). The research results indicate that anti-racism education provides benefits to
educators as well as their students.
When teachers engage in a new pedagogy, the practical offering of relevant resources can
not be under-estimated. The findings indicated that concrete support through resources and
lesson plans were highly valued. Alaca and Ryle's (2018) study revealed that teachers found it
challenging to find resources that represent all students in the classroom. Many excellent books
for the early primary students were sourced and discussed throughout the collaboration. The
findings indicated that the participants found discussions on how to incorporate the books
invaluable. The resources were another layer to be responsive to the teachers' needs. It further
built relational trust as it validated the work and time teachers were expending to implement new
pedagogy (Adams et al., 2019; Sharpe & Nishimura, 2017). The participants had the choice to
decide what resources would work for the students in their classroom. Anti-racism scholars state
that providing options is critical in embracing the philosophy of anti-racism education (hooks,
2000).

55

In summary, responding to teachers' needs will reduce risk and allow teachers to engage
in the powerful experience of anti-racism education. As leadership hears their teachers' voices
and provides them autonomy to engage in the work that is inspirational and transformational to
school systems, creating pathways that build trust and confidence to do the work is vital.
Providing opportunities to collaborate, co-teach, and observe one another's teaching are
supportive systems to consider. Offering tangible resources that teachers can discuss and
evaluate for their practice validates educators' expertise and efforts. By providing supportive
systems, teachers can embark on critical work with success and gain great professional and
personal gratification from anti-racism education.
Limitations
The results of this research had a few limiting factors, which are important to indicate.
Primarily we were five White female educators centred in the Western Eurocentric paradigm,
placing limitations on what we were able to learn and achieve without diversity in our group.
Secondly, this research, set in the elementary kindergarten context, involved students who were
receptive to talking about the importance of all people in our learning community. The
conversational complexities may look very different in other grade levels, impacting the students'
needs and teachers' risk. Finally, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected educators and students on
how we interact. We had to conduct our collaborative sessions online with a different kind of
connection than face-to-face meetings. Thus, the team's diversity, age of students, and
restrictions of a pandemic are limitations that may impact how this research may be understood.
Implications and Recommendations
Despite these limitations, this research has many narratives to tell, but the story of hope
and engaging in new beginnings is the most impactful to share at this time. This story is about

56

how five educators, including myself, came together to figure out how to engage in anti-racism
education. Together, we learned how to start a critical discussion and sustain the conversation. In
future writings, I plan to explicitly share what we taught in the classroom to guide primary
educators to formulate their thoughts and ideas for anti-racism education in their settings.
As an ally, I am deeply appreciative of the commitment of anti-racism activists to uplift
social consciousness and transcend the dichotomies in racialized narratives. This research
illuminates that some White educators are ready to understand their privilege in the Western
Eurocentric paradigm to activate anti-racism education in their classrooms. It is critical to
continue to understand the nuances of the pathologies of silence to invite educators ready to
engage in anti-racism work. As the invitation continues, the normalization of anti-racism
dialogue and anti-racism education will continue to grow.
This research provides weight to the possibilities of engaging in anti-racism work in the
early primary grades. There is limited literature on anti-racism education in the kindergarten and
the early primary grades in the Canadian context, and this research will add to the body of work.
Additional research on expanding collaborative inquiry between grade groups and school sites is
needed to support anti-racism education further. Also, research on adding diversity into inquiry
groups would help provide deeper insights into anti-racism work. Research including community
partnerships on developing anti-racism education in the primary grades will open this work to
new perspectives and possibilities.
While I have suggested that offerings of iterative collaborative inquiry groups will assist
teachers to engage in anti-racism education, not all teams may have learning assistance teachers
ready to lead anti-racism inquiry groups. Thus, if enough educators show an interest in antiracism education, school districts may want to consider equity helping teachers to assist teams

57

that are ready but unsure how to get started. There are also several other possibilities to explore
to engage schools with anti-racism work. We have learned through the pandemic that connecting
virtually is an option when face-to-face meetings may not be convenient. The online platforms
open up ideas of book studies, sharing ideas on tangible resources, and across-school
collaborations. Also, educators with similar school contexts could join established inquiry groups
with the premise of taking their experiences back to their school teams. The possibilities to
generate “good trouble” (Lewis, 2018) are endless when creative minds work together.
Final Thoughts
When I started my inquiry of anti-racism for my capstone project for my Master’s
program, I did not know how much of a positive impact it would have on my colleagues or me.
As we grew into an inquiry community and shared many exhilarating experiences together and in
the classroom, my inside voice often thought, “Wow, we must be doing this wrong; this should
feel heavier.” My reflective practice helped me navigate through my research as I constantly
asked myself questions such as, “what do we need to understand as White educators?” and “what
do all of our impressionable students need to learn and see in the classroom?”
I realized the exhilaration we experienced was the changes we were making within
ourselves as educators and how that translated into the classroom for all our students. The
organic process of embracing anti-racism education as holistic beings, using our brave hearts and
minds to embrace new possibilities, was very liberating. While we pushed against oppressive
thinking, we also envisioned and worked towards something new.
I reflected on the conversations I had with Dr. Nikki Yee, my supervisor and trusted
mentor, on how vital it is for us not just to see diversity as something to “celebrate” but to
understand diversity's critical necessity (Donald, 2016). Diversity is the strength that builds

58

healthy and sustainable communities that benefit all of us. With this understanding, my passion
for anti-racism education developed a more meaningful purpose. Throughout, I have learned that
when educators focus on connection and supporting one another, they can accomplish amazing
things for themselves and their students.

59

References
Abbotsford School District (n.d.) Equity Framework. https://www.abbyschools.ca/equityframework
Adams, P., Mombourquette, C., & Townsend, D. (2019). Leadership in education: The power of
generative dialogue. Canadian Scholars.
Alaca, B., & Pyle, A. (2018). Kindergarten teachers’ perspectives on culturally responsive
education. Canadian Journal of Education, 41(3), 753. https://www-jstororg.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/stable/26570567
Amiot, M. N., Mayer-Glenn, J., & Parker, L. (2020). Applied critical race theory: Educational
leadership actions for student equity. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 23(2), 200–220.
https://proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=eric&AN=EJ1240046&site=eds-live
Aveling, N. (2006). “Hacking at our very roots”: Rearticulating White racial identity within the
context of teacher education. Race, Ethnicity & Education, 9(3), 261–274.
http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com.proxy.ufv.ca:2048/link.asp?id=H614631H1154480
M
BC Ministry of Education. (2021). BC's course curriculum: https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/
BC Ministry of Education. (2019). BC's early learning framework.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/education-training/early-learning/teach/early-learningframework
Bennett, J. S. (2019). Fostering relational trust to engage White teachers and researchers on
reflections of race, power, and oppression. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86.
https://doi-org.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102896

60

Bennett, J. S., Driver, M. K., & Trent, S. C. (2019). Real or ideal? A narrative literature review
addressing White privilege in teacher education. Urban Education, 54(7), 891–918.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085917690205
Brown, K. (2019). Reggio Emilia approach. Salem Press Encyclopedia.
https://searchebscohostcom.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ers&AN=89164
400&site=eds-live
Butler, D. L., & Schnellert, L. (2012). Collaborative inquiry in teacher professional
development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1206–1220.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.07.009
Calliste, A. M., & Dei, G. J. S. (2000). Power, knowledge, and anti-racism education. [electronic
resource: a critical reader.] Fernwood.
Canadian Broadcasting System CBC News (2020, June 5th) Canadians hold protests, vigils for
black lives lost at the hands of police. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canadian-floydanti-racism-rallies-1.5599792?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar
Charron, K. M. (2009). Freedom’s teacher: The life of Septima Clark. ProQuest Ebook Central.
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Creswell, J.W., & Poth, C.N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among
five approaches. Sage.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1999). The teacher research movement: A decade later.
Educational Researcher, 28(7), 15-25. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1176137
Cui, D. (2017). Teachers’ racialised habitus in school knowledge construction: a Bourdieusian
analysis of social inequality beyond class. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(8),
1152–1164. https://doi-org.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/10.1080/01425692.2016.1251303

61

Davis, T. C., & Autin, N. P. (2020). The cognitive trio: Backward design, formative assessment,
and differentiated instruction. Research Issues in Contemporary Education, 5(2), 55–70.
https://searchebscohostcom.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ12
75572&site=eds-live
DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., Allen, E. M., & Boone, J. K. (2020). Examining pre-service teachers’
colour-blind racial ideology, emotion regulation, and inflexibility with stigmatizing
thoughts about race. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60.
https://doi-org.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101836
Dei, G. (2014). Personal reflections on anti-racism education for a global context. Encounters on
Education, 15, 239-249.
https://www.academia.edu/9676689/Personal_reflections_on_anti_racism_education_for_a
_global_context
Dei, G. J. S. (1996). Anti-racism education: theory and practice. Fernwood Pub.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory (third edition): An introduction.
ProQuest Ebook Central https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
DiAngelo, R. J. (2018). White fragility: Why it’s so hard for White people to talk about racism.
Beacon Press. Pluto Press.
Donald, D. (2016). From what does ethical relationality flow? An Indian Act in three artifacts. In
J. Seidel, & D. W. Jardine (Eds.), The ecological heart of teaching: Radical tales of refuge
and renewal for classrooms and communities (pp. 10-16). Bern, https://www-jstororg.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/stable/45157205
Egbo, B. (2009). Teaching for diversity in Canadian schools. Pearson Prentice Hall.

62

Fendler, L. (2014). Michel Foucault. Bloomsbury Academic.
https://proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=nlebk&AN=809844&site=eds-live&ebv=EB&ppid=pp_205
Hargreaves. D., (1999). The knowledge-creating school. British Journal of Educational
Studies, 47(2), 122–144. https://www-jstor-org.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/stable/3122196
hooks, b. (2000). Feminist theory; From margin to center. Pluto Press.
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress. Education as the practice of freedom. Routledge
Government of Canada (2021, March 1st). Coronavirus disease (COVID-19).
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/diseases/coronavirus-disease-covid19.html
Jayakumar, U. M., & Adamian, A. S. (2017). The fifth frame of colour-blind ideology:
Maintaining the comforts of colourblindness in the context of White fragility. Sociological
Perspectives, 60(5), 912–936. https://doiorg.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/10.1177/0731121417721910
Katz, J., & Sokal, L. (2016). Universal design for learning as a bridge to inclusion: A qualitative
report of student voices. International Journal of Whole Schooling 12(2), 36- 64
https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ1118092
Kaser, L. and Halbert, J. (2009), Leadership mindsets: Innovation and learning in the
transformation of schools. Routledge.
Kendi, I. X. (2019). How to be an anti-racist. One World.
Knowles, R. T., & Hawkman, A. M. (2020). Anti-racist quantitative research: Developing,
validating, and implementing racialized reaching efficacy and racial fragility scales. Urban
Review, 52(2), 238–262. https://doi-org.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/10.1007/s11256-019-00526-1

63

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159–165. https://eds-a-ebscohostcom.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=8&sid=f3c20717-adff-411e-a37a6c4d3c347349%40sessionmgr102
Langley School District (2021, February 19). Langley anti-racism: A letter to parents.
https://www.sd35.bc.ca/students-parents/safe-inclusive-schools/langley-anti-racism-aletter-to-parents/
Lewis, J. @repjohnlewis. (2018June 27) do not get lost in a sea of despair. Be hopeful. Be
optimistic. #good trouble. [tweet]. Twitter.com/repjohnlewis
McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege and male privilege: A personal account of coming to see
correspondences through work in women's studies.
https://www.collegeart.org/pdf/diversity/White-privilege-and-male-privilege.pdf
McIntosh, P. (July-August, 1989). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack
https://psychology.umbc.edu/files/2016/10/White-Privilege_McIntosh-1989.pdf
Matias, C. E., & Mackey, J. (2016). Breakin’ down Whiteness in antiracist teaching: Introducing
critical Whiteness pedagogy. The Urban Review, 1, 32. https://doiorg.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/10.1007/s11256-015-0344-7
McManimon, S. K., & Casey, Z. A. (2018). (Re)Beginning and becoming: Antiracism and
professional development with White practicing teachers. Teaching Education, 29(4), 395–
406.
https://proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=eric&AN=EJ1204565&site=eds-live

64

Miled, N. (2019). Educational leaders’ perceptions of multicultural education in teachers’
professional development: A case study from a Canadian school district. Multicultural
Education Review, 11(2), 79–95.
https://proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=eric&AN=EJ1217968&site=eds-live
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Ch 11. Qualitative data analysis: A
methods sourcebook (Edition 3.). SAGE Publications, Inc
Mission School District. (2020, November 6). Anti-racism discrimination policy ADM.30(C)
https://www.mission.ca/wp-content/uploads/ADM.30C-Anti-Racial-Discrimination-and
Anti-Racism-Policy.pdf
Mosley, M. (2010). “That really hit me hard”: Moving beyond passive anti-racism to engage
with critical race literacy pedagogy. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 13(4), 449–471.
https://proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=eric&AN=EJ911089&site=eds-live
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to
meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1).
https://doi-org.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/10.1177/1609406917733847
Parhar, N., & Sensoy, O. (2011). Culturally relevant pedagogy redux: Canadian teachers’
conceptions of their work and its challenges. Canadian Journal of Education, 34(2), 189–
218. http://journals.sfu.ca/cje/index.php/cje-rce/article/view/347/1010
Pendolf, A. (2018). All are welcome. Alfred A. Knopf Books for Young Readers.
Menakem. (2017). My grandmother’s hands: Racialized trauma and the pathway to mending
Our hearts and bodies. Central Recovery Press.

65

Saad, L. (2020). Me and White supremacy: combat racism, change the world and become a good
ancestor. Source Books.
Safir, S. (2017). The listening leader: creating the conditions for equitable school
transformation. Jossey-Bass.
Saldaña, J. (2009. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE.
Sharpe, K., & Nishimura, J. (2017). When mentoring meets coaching: Shifting the stance in
education. Pearson.
Stone, D., Heen, S., & Patton, B. (2010). Difficult conversations: How to discuss what matters
most (Tenth Anniversary edition). Penguin Books.
Shields, C. M. (2004). Dialogic leadership for social justice: Overcoming pathologies of
silence. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 109–132.
https://proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=eric&AN=EJ739181&site=eds-live
Surrey School District (2021, February 2). Anti-discrimination & human rights regulation
#10900.1
https://www.surreyschools.ca/departments/SECT/PoliciesRegulations/section_10000/Docu
ments/10900.1%20Regulation.pdf#search=anti%20racist
Taylor, D. (2011). Michel Foucault: Key concepts. Routledge.
https://proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=nlebk&AN=924390&site=eds-live&ebv=EB&ppid=pp_55
Taylor, G. P., & Zinn, J. O. (2006). Current directions in risk research: New developments in
psychology and sociology. Risk analysis: An International Journal, 26(2), 397–411.
https://doi-org.proxy.ufv.ca:2443/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00746.x

66

Twyford, K., Le Fevre, D. and Timperley, H. (2017), The influence of risk and uncertainty on
teachers’ responses to professional learning and development. Journal of Professional
Capital and Community, 2(2), 86-100. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPCC-10-2016-0028
Ullucci, K. (2012). Knowing we are White: Narrative as critical praxis. Teaching
Education, 23(1),89 107.
https://proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=eric&AN=EJ954831&site=eds-live
Vancouver School Board (2020, December 14). Anti-racism and non-discrimination policy 21.
https://www.vsb.bc.ca/District/Board-ofEducation/Policy_Manual/Documents/sbfile/180928/21-Policy21-AntiRacism%20and%20Non-discrimination.pdf
Vaught, S., Castagno, A. (2008). “I don’t think I’m a racist:” Critical race theory, teacher
attitudes, and structural racism. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 11(2), 95–113.
https://proxy.ufv.ca:2443/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=eric&AN=EJ799649&site=eds-live
Yee, N. L. (2020). Collaborating across communities to co-construct supports for Indigenous
(and all) students (T). University of British Columbia.
https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0392533
York, S. (2016). Roots and wings: Affirming culture and preventing bias in early childhood
(3rd ed.). Redleaf Press.

67

Appendix A
Human Research Ethics Board Approval

68

Appendix B
Debriefing Norms
The participants were invited to co-construct norms for the debriefing sessions. All
protocols were subject to the examination and approval of the group. The following are examples
but are not limited to the norms we can bring forth:
•

Schedule meetings at a time that is convenient for all participants.

•

Respect the time of the group.

•

If participants need a scheduled meeting time to extend a bit longer, we will do so with
the group's permission.

•

Each participant can have equitable and uninterrupted time to speak. (Talking stick however, the group decides)

•

Confidentiality – what is said in the group stays in the group.

•

No judgments – we are all learning together.

•

Support of each other’s learning – assume the best - come from a place of inquiry – if
extra support is required, the researcher will follow up and ensure it is provided.

•

The researcher will take notes on the debriefings and offer the notes to the participants
for review. They can make revisions, omissions, and additions.

•

The participants can opt-out of answering any questions.

•

The participants may request a break as needed.

69

Appendix C
Interview Protocol and Questions

HREB UFV Ethics Permission 100540
Research Interview Questions
University of the Fraser Valley
Interview
This document is an overview of how I wish to open the interview with the participant(s)
and the information I will provide. My first question on their previous engagement with antiracism education will allow me to understand their anti-racism experiences and knowledge. It
will also be helpful to hear their definition of anti-racism curriculum and pedagogy from their
perspective. My first two questions warm the participant up for my third question, which is the
crux of the research, what are their perceptions of working with anti-racism curriculum and
pedagogy. It is a very open-ended question as I want to learn about their experiences. I have
shared some prompting questions I may use for clarification and expansion of their perceptions.
Introduction to the Interview
I want to extend my appreciation for your participation in my research. This is the final
interview where you will share your experiences of engaging in this process, the collaboration,
the debriefing, and the teaching of the unit. I expect the interview to last less than 60 minutes.
There are no right or wrong answers; please just share the truth of your experience. I have
emailed you a copy of your debriefing reflections before the interview for you your review. You
may refer to them in the interview if you wish.
I previously provided you with my main questions, but I may ask you supplemental
questions if needed. Take the time you need to think about the question and answer when you are
ready.
Before we begin, I just want to confirm that I have your permission to audio record this
interview. If you like, I can provide you with a copy of the notes I will use to analyze what you
have said. You may add to the notes, or we can re-visit any sections that are of concern to you.
Your pseudonym will be used for the interview, so your identity will remain confidential.
Do you have any questions for me before we begin the interview?
Questions
1.
What are your previous experiences with equity and anti-racism?
2.
How do you define anti-racism curriculum and pedagogy?
3.
Tell me about your experience in collaborating and implementing this unit on
anti-racism.
Additional prompts may include:
a.
Can you expand on that?

70

b.
c.
d.

You have mentioned ________ a few times; how is there significance in this for
you?
What is at the heart of that specific experience for you?
You used the term _______. Could you provide me with an example of this?

Additional questions to prompt a nuanced response:
a.
It sounds like you had many positive experiences, is there anything that was not
positive or created some dissonance for you?
b.
You have shared many examples of dissonance you experienced; is there anything
positive or empowering you?
c.
You have mentioned the co-planning a few times and how that was for you. Was
there another part of the experience that was significant to you?
At the end of the interview, I will thank the participant for their time and participation in
the interview. I will inform the participant of the next steps for the member check of the
transcript and that once they have made their revisions, omissions, or additions, I would like to
have it returned one week after they receive it. I will also ask the participants for the
demographic information they would like to describe in the final report (age, gender,
positionality, years of experience teaching, grade they teach).
Before we conclude the interview, do you have any questions for me?

71

Appendix D
Debriefing Template
What?

Now What?

Front Page

So What?

72

What? Examples

Now What? Examples

•

What happened?

•

•

What did you observe?

you asking now that

what you have

•

What role did you

you have had this

learned from this

play?

experience?

experience?

•

•

What were your

What would you like
to learn about this

What part of the

you?

experience?

•

What did this

•

What do you need to

find challenging?

experience make you

do to address any

What part of the

feel?

challenges that arose

What conclusions can

during this

find exciting?

you draw from this

experience?

What did you find

experience?

surprising?
•

•

How will you apply

make an impact on

experience did you
•

How did this event

•

expectations?
experience did you
•

•

What questions are

So What? Examples

•

•

What did you learn?
•

•

How will this

What did you learn

experience contribute

about yourself?

to your career?

What did you learn

•

about others?

How will this
experience change
your community
going forward?

•

How can you
continue to get
involved in this sort
of experience?

Back Page

73

Appendix E
Timeline of Events
Team Session
Dates
January 13, 2021
- First
Collaboration
Meeting

Results of
Meeting
• Group Norms
• Meeting
Schedule
• Definitions of
Anti-racism
Education
• Established
teaching an
explicit unit on
ant-racism

Weekly
Preparation
The researcher
shared minutes
to the team for
member check

Resource
Choices
Gathering
Resources

Activities
Sourcing Ideas

• Plan Unit
The researcher
Gathering
Sourcing Ideas
Framework
wrote minutes
Resources
• Community – to Share with
Diversity/Race
Team
Racism/AntiMember/Check
racism –
• Wrote up
Ally/Activism
Lesson Plans to
• Lesson Plans 1 Email to
and 2 –
Participants
Definition of
• Gathered
Community
Resources
Team Commenced Teaching Unit In the Classroom January 25, 2020
Guiding Definition
Community - Where people work, play and learn together, everyone is safe, happy, and all
belong.
January 27, 2021 • Participants
The researcher a kids book about Bulletin Board First Debriefing - share out
wrote minutes belonging Family Wall Collaboration
• Planned
to Share with
Kevin Carroll *
Story Workshop Meeting
Lessons for the Team
All are Welcome Inclusive Visuals
(Participants are following week Member/Check - Alexandra
and Concept Sort
now teaching the • Share possible • Wrote up
Penfold * We All - Group
unit – and
resources to use Lesson Plans
Belong -Natalie
Discussions learning from
• Discussions – to Email to
and Alex Goss * Share around the
one another –
Othering
Participants
A World of
room (You
engaged in anti- Racism
• Gathered
Kindness Belong Here) racism dialogue) Definitions
Resources
Pajamas Press *
Community
When We Are
Centers Kind - Monique
January 20,
2021- Second
Collaboration
Meeting

74

Gray Smith * Be
Kind-Pat Zietlow
Miller

Teacher/Student
conferences

Guiding Definitions
Diversity - People are different in many ways, and that makes us all special and wonderful.
Diversity makes our communities stronger.
Race – A group of people with the same ancestors and similar shades of skin. All races are
wonderful and beautiful.
Melanin – It is in our bodies and protects us from the sun. (If we have lots of melanin, our
skin is darker) All colours of skin are wonderful and beautiful.
February 3, 2021 • Participants
• Researcher
You matter Painting Project -Second
share out
wrote minutes Christian
mixing custom
Debriefing and
• Planned
to Share with
Robinson * Let's paint pots - Video
Collaboration
Lessons for the Team
Talk About Race Bill Nye (melanin
Meeting
following week Member/Check - Julius Lester *
- protects skin
• Share possible • Wrote up
Same, Same but
from the sun) resources to use Lesson Plans
Different - Jenny Diversity Visuals
• Discussions – to Email to
Sue Kostecki *
(Do we know
on Privilege
Participants
Same Difference how people think
• Gathered
- Calida Garcia
or feel by the
Resources
Rawles * Skin
colour of their
Like Mine skin?)- World
Latashia M.
Globe (shine a
Perry * Hair
flashlight to show
Love - Matthew
where the Earth
A.Cherry gets the most sun)
Happy in our
- Different ways
Skin-Fran
of knowing and
Manushkin * I
showing kindness
am Human - Heart Maps
Susan Verde *
Mommy's
Khimar - Jamilah
Thompkins
Bigelow
February 10,
•Participants
•Researcher
As Above
As Above
2021
share out
wrote minutes
Third Debriefing • Planned
to Share with
and
Lessons for the
Team
Collaboration
following week Member/Check
Meeting - Team • Share possible • Wrote up
Continues to
resources to use Lesson Plans
finish up on
• Discussions –
to Email to
Community and on Canadian
Participants
Diversity
Historical

75

(Participants are Context –
• Gathered
now teaching the Decolonization
Resources
unit – and
learning from
one another –
engaged in antiracism dialogue)
Guiding Definition
Racism - People being treated unfairly because of the colour of their skin. It hurts their heart.
February 18,
•Participants
• Researcher
Chocolate Me Social stories 2021
share out
wrote minutes Taye Diggs *
Role Plays with
Fourth
• Planned
to Share with
Racism and
Puppets: Bullying
Debriefing and
Lessons for the Team
Intolerance -Unkind-Racism
Collaboration
following week Member/Check Louise Spilsbury - What would
Meeting
• Share possible • Wrote up
and Hanane Kai
you do if?
(Participants are resources to use Lesson Plans
* a kids book
Teacher-Student
now teaching the • Discussions – to Email to
about racism conferences
unit – and
on Canadian
Participants
Jelani Memory
Continue to Build
learning from
Historical
• Gathered
Bulletin Boards
one another –
Context –
Resources
engaged in anti- Decolonization
racism dialogue)
Guiding Definitions
Ally – People who want all people to be treated fairly and belong to the community.
Activism: When people work together to make sure all people belong to the community.
February 24N/A
N/A
Intersection
Bulletin Boards March 1, 2021,
Allies - Chelsea
Ways to Support
Final Interviews
Johnson, Latoya Others- Class
with each
Council, and
Review and
participant
Carolyn Choi - A Discussions
individually.
is for Activist Teachers
Innocent Nagara
complete
* Let the
teaching the unit.
Children March Monica