User:Ariellibelly/sandbox

Possible articles for practice experience area and sector

Here is what I've found so far which I think would be relevant for my practice experience:

Area:

California Rancheria Termination Acts or Bloody Island Massacre or California Genocide

Sector:

Ecopedagogy or Democratic education

Ariellibelly (talk) 22:52, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ariel, it's Bori. I just now got to writing on a classmate's sandbox. And while I'm at it, since we talked about it last week, here's a link to changing your username if you want to:

Wikipedia:Changing username

Evaluating two articles

Below is my evaluation of the article Reservation poverty:

• While the information in the article is relevant, a lot of relevant information is still missing. There is currently no section on non-profit work with indigenous nations nor is there info on community-led poverty alleviation initiatives. Several things seem to be in the wrong section; for example, all local reform efforts and anti-poverty programs are lumped under the "Government assistance" header, and there is an environmental justice paragraph haphazardly thrown into the "contemporary policy" section when frankly it needs a section all to itself. Both of these issues are problematic and could use rectifying.
• This article presents lots of opportunities to learn basic government policy and the political economy of reservation poverty through a Katzian lens. It is relevant for my PE because it will give me lots of legal, historical, and political context to help me understand the particularities of working on poverty alleviation with this specific community.
• The article seems neutral, although risks generalization at times through a lack of thorough citation
• There are almost no indigenous voices present in this article. to my mind this is a glaring flaw that needs fixing, since the lack of indigenous representation of their experiences reinforces power imbalances between indigenous nations and dominant political and economic systems.
• Several spots are flagged for citation issues.
• Lots of opportunity here to add a ton more links and citation, but most of the links that are live in the article are good.
• Most sources are good, but some need improvement (ex: one source is a history channel documentary...)
• The talk page is civil and insightful, and full of good ideas which I will take into account while editing.
• The article is part of the Wikipedia Ambassadors Program for 2011 and 2013, as well as a WikiProject Sociology of Poverty for 2011.
• The way the article is organized and its lack of indigenous voices is problematic. At times it glosses over important points which deserve more attention, and can sound a touch paternalistic due to its lack of equal representation of voices. To my mind this reinforces an "ivory tower" power bias (via knowledge dissemination), while not adequately addressing issues of systemic power imbalance, political economy, and resource availability. There is ample opportunity to bring this article more into line with what we are learning in GPP.

Here's my evaluation of the article Ecopedagogy:

• Everything in the article seems relevant, but the language is so technical it isn't appropriate for the average wiki reader.
• I'll be working hands-on in the field with the PPN on a Food, Energy, Water systems project (currently under design and tbd) and helping with educational workshops in the FEWS sector. This is exactly what the praxis of ecopedagogy is designed for!
• The article is not neutral. It has no representation of the criticisms or possible flaws of ecopedagogy.
• The theory of ecopedagogy gets ample screen-time, but the actual praxis of ecopedagogy gets zero. This provides a great opportunity for improvement. Also, no contrasting viewpoint on the drawbacks/downsides of this education style are presented.
• The article mentions that the movement aims to highlight the interrelation of humans and the environment (i.e. the non-human world). This is very much in line with the theory of "socionatures" (humans and environments are constantly making, shaping, and remaking each other in real time and on many different, interrelated scales via webs of power) stemming from Political Ecology. I think it would be really cool to link socionatures and political ecology into this conversation. (I'm super passionate about Political Ecology, obviously :) )
• This article desperately needs more citation. Ex: it mentions egopedagogy degree programs without any link, citation, or proof
• There are no criticisms of ecopedagogy in the entire article. Also, lots of info missing on how this theory is put into practice.
• In the talk page, everyone complains about the extremely technical level in which the article is currently written. One editor complains that this theory is simply another tactic to "greenwash" education (another reason that this article could use a more balanced viewpoint via a section about criticisms and a section about praxis)
• The article is rated by Wikipedia as too technical. It is also a WikiProject on Education
• It is different from what I've learned from GPP (especially after reading Katz) in that it focuses on education as a solution without addressing access to resources (including education), nor does it address political economy or hegemonic institutions and systems of power. If the actual field does address this, I cannot glean that from this article and I need to do further research so that I can amend this in the article.

More thoughts to come as I continue to research!

Moving forward:

In the Reservation Poverty article, I've decided to focus on adding an EJ section, since environmental injustice and poverty are highly interrelated. I've found some really great articles which I've listed below in my Bibliography section. For the Ecopedagogy article, I have found several interesting articles which discuss the theory in action, as well as some criticisms.

Beginning Bibliography

Here is what I'm working with so far:

Area Article: Reservation Poverty

1. Burger, J and Gochfeld, M. 2011. “Conceptual Environmental Justice Model for Evaluating Chemical Pathways of Exposure in Low-Income, Minority, Native American, and Other Unique Exposure Populations”. American Journal of Public Health. Vol. 101 No. S1.

·     Summary: This paper analyzes the pathways and disproportionate exposure of environmental risk to marginalized or disadvantaged communities in the United States. It presents a conceptual model to evaluate nonstandard pathways of exposure for communities that have a wide “exposure matrix” of environmental hazards. Hazards are not only based on geography but also influenced by a host of other societal, political, and economic factors.

·     Relevance: I plan on creating a section in the Reservation Poverty article on Environmental Injustice and the proximity of pollutants to many reservations. This article will provide useful information of not only large and obvious pathways to exposure, but also information on nonstandard pathways of exposure.

2. Holifield, R. 2012. “Environmental Justice as Recognition and Participation in Risk Assessment: Negotiating and Translating Health Risk at a Superfund Site in Indian Country”. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 102(3) pp. 591-613.

·     Summary: this paper looks at environmental justice from a geographic lens with the understanding that “multiple spatialities” are wrapped up in EJ. The author argues that EJ has not engaged with the process of risk assessment and the construction of risk fully, especially regarding geographically and politically situated Native American communities.

·     Relevance: This article will help me highlight the particular challenges of addressing EJ on reservations and with Native American communities due to their unique political, cultural, economic, and geographic legacies.

3. Shriver, T., and Webb, G. 2009. “Rethinking the Scope of Environmental Injustice: Perceptions of Health Hazards in a Rural Native American Community Exposed to Carbon Black”. Rural Sociology. 74(2) pp. 270-292.

·     Summary: This paper uses social science survey and research methods to examine environmental health and justice perspectives in Native American communities.

·     Relevance: I think it is vital for indigenous voices to be represented here, and this article will provide those voices.

4. Zaferatos, N. 2006. "Environmental Justice in Indian Country: Dumpsite Remediation on the Swinomish Indian Reservation". Environmental Management. 38 pp. 896-909.

• Summary: This article uses a case study of Washington State's Swinomish nation to articulate how EJ is particularly nuanced on sovereign tribal land.
• Relevance: The article highlights Native American struggles to have a voice in environmental protection on their territories, and how it took decades for the Swinomish nation to gain equitable and appropriate protection and remediation of their land.

5. Begaye, E. 2006. "The Black Mesa Controversy". Cultural Survival Quarterly. Vol 29, Iss. 4.

• Summary: EJ can have short term negative economic consequences on tribal nations who have partnered with polluting industries (the example in this article is coal mining and transportation via slurry). Native American nations partner with industry for many reasons, but a dominant reason is because these industries are often the only employer in the region.
• Relevance: This is a great example of how a tribe has fought and won against environmental injustice!

6. Morello-Frosch et al. 2011. "Understanding the Cumulative Impacts of Inequalities in Environmental Health: Implications for Policy". Health Affairs. Vol 30, No. 5 pp.879-887

• Summary: Communities of color and low-income communities have poorer health outcomes than majority white and/or wealthier communities. Short term and long term health impacts are not fully understood at this time. We need cumulative impact studies and longitudinal studies to truly assess vulnerability
• Relevance: This article provides useful information on health impacts in relation to environmental injustice, as well as the difficulties presented in measuring health impacts.

7. Mohai et al. 2009. " Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Residential Proximity to Polluting Industrial Facilities: Evidence from the Americans' Changing Lives Study". American Journal of Public Health. Supplement 3. Vol. 99, No. s3 pp. s649-s656.

• Summary: This article provides an overview of statistical methods EJ measurement throughout the last 3 decades.
• Relevance: Provides historically useful information of research methods and criticisms of methods. The authors argue for continued study on longitudinal health impacts, as well as analysis that moves beyond the unit-hazard coincidence method (analysis based on census data) and focuses on tong term longitudinal data and survey data.

8. Ranco, Darren; Suagee, Dean (2007). "Tribal Sovereignty and the Problem of Difference in Environmental Regulation: Observations on 'Measured Separatism' in Indian Country". Antipode. 39:4: 691–707.

• Summary: This article summarizes the legal frameworks, history, and policies that affect Native nations' ability to legislate environmental regulation, degradation and remediation in the United States. Specifically, this article discusses the relationship between Native nations, the EPA, the Supreme Court, and the state governments. Two specific agreements between Native nations and the Federal government are discussed: "Treatment as State" and the Federal government's legal obligation of "trustee-ship" of Native nations.
• Relevance: Sovereignty is vital to any discussion of Native nations, and moreover, due to their legal status, in some cases Native nations have more agency to fight against environmental injustice than do other EJ communities.

9. Ranco, Darren. 2008. The Trust Responsibility and Limited Sovereignty: What Can Environmental Justice Groups Learn from Indian Nations?” Society & Natural Resources, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 354–362., doi:10.1080/08941920701329710.

• Summary: This article examines the federal trust responsibility and Treatment in the same manner as a state (TAS) and how effective they are in Native American Environmental Justice activism. The author argues that these policy mechanisms are not effective in addressing EJ on reservations, and calls for increased funding of tribal environmental protection infrastructure.
• Relevance: Knowing and understanding the legal framework and precedents of Native American environmental justice and how it applies to poverty and poverty work on reservations is vital for creating a multi-pronged approach to understanding and addressing this complex web of issues.

Sector Article: Ecopedagogy

1.  McLaren, P and Houston, D. 2004. “Revolutionary Ecologies: Ecosocialism and Critical Pedagogy”. Educational Studies. Vol 36:1 Pp. 27-45.

·     Summary: This paper argues that critical and revolutionary educational praxis is increasingly shaped by and through ecological politics and imaginaries. The authors argue, utilizing a political ecological perspective that given the pervasiveness of environmental crisis in our everyday lives and vocabularies, critical educators can no longer ignore questions of ecojustice.

·     Relevance: I see tremendous overlap in the theories of ecopedagogy and political ecology, while each offers critical perspectives of the other. I think this conversation would greatly enrich the Wikipedia article.

2. Bowers, C.A. 2005. “How Peter McLaren and Donna Houston, and Other “Green” Marxists Contribute to the Globalization of the West’s Industrial Culture”. Educational Studies. Vol. 37:2 pp. 185-195.

·     Summary: this is a discussion and rejoinder of the previous article mentioned above. In his critique, Bowers argues that Freirean theorists (and ecopedagogical theory and praxis) have become divorced from the political realities of the modern world. His is a strong critique of eco-pedagogy, Freirean theory, and Marxist theory.

·     Relevance: The Wikipedia article currently lacks any criticism of eco-pedagogy, a contentious issue on the talk page. This article would help fix this issue by offering an opposing viewpoint.

3. Houston, D. and McLaren, P. 2005. "The Nature of Political Amnesia: A Response to C.A. "Chet" Bowers". Educational Studies. Vol. 37:2 pp. 196-205

• Summary: This is Houston and McLaren's rejoinder to C.A. Bowers' critique of their article.

• Relevance: This is the response to C.A. Bowers's critique of their original article and so I felt it was fitting to allow them their rebuttal. Both sides write with such acrimony it could peel paint off the wall. Their responses tell as much about their ideological stances, academic histories/lineages, and blind spots as they do about the discourse surrounding eco-pedagogy.

4. Gruenewald, David A. 2005. "More Than One Profound Truth: Making Sense of Divergent Criticalities". Educational Studies. Vol. 37:2 pp. 206-215.

• Summary: This is a rejoinder and discussion of the 3 previous articles from one of the editors of this issue of Educational Studies. In this discussion, Gruenewald attempts to get to the heart of the fundamental difference of approach between McLaren and Houston (representing the Freirean tradition of critical pedagogy) and Bowers (which Gruenewald frames as a bioregional approach).
• Relevance: Since the discussion between authors has been akin to academic undressing and upbraiding, I thought it would be good to hear from another perspective, especially as Gruenewald is a self-proclaimed fan of both Bowers and McLaren.

5. Martisewicz, Rebecca A. 2005. "On Acknowledging Differences that Make a Difference: My Two Cents". Educational Studies. Vol 37:2 pp. 215-224.

• Summary: Here the other editor of this issue of Educational Studies joins the fray to clear up some of the theoretical and ideological differences of the respective authors, and weighs in on Gruenewald's analysis.
• Relevance: Martisewicz has some exceptionally useful insights on the criticisms of critical pedagogy, eco-pedagogy, and Freirean theory.

6. Bowers, C.A. 2004. "Revitalizing the Commons or An Individualized Approach to Planetary Citizenship:The Choice Before Us". Educational Studies. Vol 36:1

• Summary: Bowers critiques ecopedagogy's focus on individualism and the idea of a revolutionary academic journey which individuals must have on their own. He argues instead for revitalization of a planetary commons.
• Relevance: A critique of one of the tenets of ecopedagogy is very useful for understanding its opponents.

7. Bowers, C.A. 2012. "Questioning the idea of the individual as an autonomous moral agent". Journal of Moral Education. Vol. 41: 3 pp. 301-310

• Summary: Bowers argues that mainstream morals are situated in Western normative idolization of individualism and the individual as a moral agent. He argues that this focus on individualism is ecologically unsustainable and does not properly take into account the interconnectedness of human and non-human nature, nor does it take into account cultures with more ecocentric systems.
• Relevance: This provides great insight not only on a criticism of ecopedagogy, but also gives an interesting alternate discourse.

Summarizing and Synthesizing

here is a section I have pulled directly from the "Reservation Poverty" page, which I am editing and finding additional sources for. Anything in bold is my work in the article, all else is pulled from the original article.

Reservations are semi-autonomous territories within the United States that are managed by an indigenous tribal government in cooperation with the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs, a branch of the Department of the Interior, located in Washington, DC. Communities on reservations face specific challenges, and are disparately affected by poverty. Income, employment, and educational attainment in these areas are considerably lower than national averages.

Reservations vary drastically in terms of their size, population, political economy, culture and traditions. Despite such variation, all reservations share similar histories of colonization, and face similar contemporary challenges. Poverty is a challenge which many Native nations face. There are 334 reservations in the United States today. (citation in live Wiki) In 2010, the poverty rate on Native land was 28.4 percent, compared with a 22 percent poverty rate among all Native Americans nationwide. The official U.S. poverty rate for 2016 was much lower, at 12.7 percent. In addition to poverty rates, reservations are hindered by low education levels (citation in live wiki), poor healthcare services, low employment, substandard housing, and deficient economic infrastructure. (the following came out of the "Contemporary Policy" Section. I removed EJ issues from this section and created a sub-header EJ section, since this issue has both historic and contemporary policy significance and is more complex on tribal lands.)

Environmental Justice on Native American Reservations

"Explicitly exploitative policies towards native communities persist. Reservations in relatively close proximity to urban areas have become sites for waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs), adding environmental degradation to the landscape of poverty. Living in proximity to high levels of pollution or industrial facilities has been linked to serious short-term and long-term health impacts. In what is perhaps the most negative use of Native lands, the federal government has used reservations for nuclear testing and disposal. Uranium mining and milling, uranium conversion and enrichment, and nuclear weapons testing have all occurred on reservation lands in the past century. After creating the Nevada Test Site on Western Shoshone lands in Nevada, the government tested over 650 atomic weapons on Shoshone land between 1951 and 1991. The Western Shoshone people call themselves the “most bombed nation on the planet.” Similar activities happened on Pauite Shoshone lands. (citiation in live wiki) For Native nations, environmental justice on tribal land is more than the enforcement of equitable protection of human health and natural resources, it is also a matter of tribal sovereignty, self determination, and redistribution of power. The field of environmental justice (EJ), which focuses on measuring and mitigating patterns of disproportionate exposure to environmental pollutants and health hazards, has been a useful ally for Native nations in the fight against environmental degradation on reservations. Over the past several decades, EJ communities, researchers and activists have used varied methodology to measure the disparate siting and long-term health effects of locally unwanted land uses, waste treatment facilities, and other noxious point sources of pollution in relation to communities of color and other socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. Native governments on reservations have used their legal "Treatment as State" status with the Federal government to mount EJ claims with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in several cases to successfully legally push back against pollution and environmental degradation on their lands .However, many Native activists argue that a seat at the table “does not ensure a comparable serving of the environmental protection pie”

Ecopedagogy

this is what I am working on for ecopedagogy:

"Ecopedagogy aims to create educational programs that interrogate the intersection of social, political, economic and environmental systems. Ecopedagogy began in a Latin American educational context, growing out of discussions conducted at the second Earth Summit, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. In this movement, educators desired to present a theory and discourse regarding the interrelationship between society and the environment, and to formulate a mission for Critical pedagogy to integrate an ecological ethic. This mission statement would eventually be ratified as the Earth Charter in 2000. In 1999, the Instituto Paulo Freire, Brasil under the direction of Moacir Gadotti, along with the Earth Council and UNESCO, convened the First International Symposium on the Earth Charter in the Perspective of Education, which was quickly followed by the First International Forum on Ecopedagogy. These conferences led not only to the final formation of the Earth Charter Initiative but to key movement documents such as the Ecopedagogy Charter, as reiterated in Gadotti’s essay Pedagogy of the Earth and the Culture of Sustainability (2000). Gadotti and others in the Ecopedagogy movement have remained influential in advancing the Earth Charter Initiative and continue to mount ecopedagogy seminars, degree programs, workshops and other learning opportunities through a number of international Paulo Freire Institutes."

Objectives and aims

Ecopedagogy's primary goal is to create a "planetary consciousness" through revolutionary teaching and learning. As a outgrowth of critical pedagogy, ecopedagogy critiques environmental education and education for sustainable development as vain attempts by mainstream forms of pedagogy seeking to appear relevant regarding current issues of environmental degradation. While environmental education strategies accomplish much that is welcome and good from an ecopedagogical perspective, ecopedagogy questions (especially within the context of the United States) the ways in which environmental education is often reduced to forms of experiential pedagogy and outdoor education that may deal uncritically with the mainstream experience of “nature” as pristine wilderness. Ecopedagogy is critical of mainstream representations of nature that are potentially informed by racist, sexist, and classist values. Further, ecopedagogy interrogates the way environmental education is tethered to state and corporate-sponsored science and social studies standards, or otherwise fails to articulate the political necessity for widespread understanding of the ways in which modern society promotes unsustainable lifestyles. Ecopedagogy aimed to utilize the ongoing United Nations Decade of Educational for Sustainable Development (2005–2015) to make strategic interventions on behalf of the oppressed, while simultaneously attempting to unpack the concept of sustainable development and make it less ambiguous.

Criticisms of Ecopedagogy

Both supporters and critics of ecopedagogy agree that historically, critical educators in the West have been largely unsuccessful at addressing environmental issues in their classrooms. However, much disagreement still exists between critics and supporters of ecopedagogy on the ethics, theoretical approach, and methodology of this pedagogical style. One prominent critic, C.A. Bowers, argues that were ecopedagogy (and the larger critical pedagogy of Freire and Gadotti) universally adopted, it would contribute to the hegemonic spread of Western culture and systems, thereby choking out non-Western ways of thinking, viewing, and interacting with the human and built environments. Bowers further argues that adoption of Freirean ecopedagogy would hasten the existence of a world monoculture and would fail to address the systemic roots of the current ecological crisis and fail to protect the commons from further exploitation. In this view, ecopedagogy is akin to an educational Trojan horse that is little more than a vehicle for transmitting Western culture and domination. Moderate critics of ecopedagogy argue that the critical lens of ecopedagogy can be useful, but that its adherents must be actively critical of ecopedagogy itself. They argue that without a constant focus on understanding and fostering diversity in thought, culture, and ecosystem, ecopedagogy is meaningless and could be counter-productive to its aims. Ecopedagogy (and critical pedagogy) has also been heavily criticized for not being critical of the categories that underlie its work. Here, critics argue that in valuing individualism, ecopedagogy fails to attend to traditional eco-centered cultures' already deep connection to the non-human world. Moreover, some scholars from the eco- and critical pedagogical traditions fail to recognize how the "primary categories in classical liberal thought may operate in the discourse of critical pedagogy".