Teaching

Teaching Philosophy

As an undergraduate at The University of Hawai’i at Mānoa, my initial field of study was in masculinities of Polynesia. Through this coursework, I learned the concept of a’o, which means to teach, to learn, and to counsel. As the philosophy behind a’o is that those who learn have a responsibility to teach, while those who teach have a responsibility to continue learning, which pairs naturally with Freire’s (2000) Critical Pedagogy. A’o is my guiding principle in academic settings, as I tutored students as an undergraduate, teach as a graduate student, and navigated the administrative side of academia as New Student Liaison for the department of anthropology at The University of Iowa. In addition to my passion for mentoring and sharing my knowledge with others, I also leave myself open to learn new points of view from my students, peers, and superiors, whether it be course content related, alternative teaching styles, or types of assignments to give.

Over the past several years, the discipline of anthropology has been reckoning with its colonial past and working against the continued reproduction of hegemonic values. Debates about who should be in the canon, how to acknowledge the past and move forward, and a greater focus on reflexivity in academia have played out publicly at conferences and in classrooms across the world. At the same time, the COVID-19 pandemic led to a greater call for recognizing flexibility and care in the classroom. As a product of Western education during these systemic shifts, my teaching philosophy has been greatly shaped by a call for the inclusion of multiple voices in course content through De- and Anticolonial pedagogies, and an ability to adapt to student needs through Universal Design for Learning.

I design courses to expose students to ideas that they may not get in other their other classes or provide them a new way to look at familiar topics. This is in line with the anthropological concept of “Making the strange familiar and the familiar strange.” For instance, in my course, Beyond Machismo, I include many of the same topics students will encounter regarding women in other gender and sexuality courses, such as economics, sex work, and families, but apply the same feminist theories to masculinities in Mexico. This provides insight into how gender and sexual identities are constructed relationally, rather than separately.

I believe that to best engage students and facilitate discussions that both support and challenge their ideas, I must establish an environment where students feel safe to express themselves and ask questions. When I teach, I am upfront with students and share that it is impossible to cover everything in a single course, so there may be multiple viewpoints or opposing theories about any given topic. While I include diverse perspectives in required readings, I tell students that I do not always agree with the arguments that authors in course readings make and encourage them to express their own opposing views on topics, so long as they can also demonstrate an understanding of the argument being presented in class.

In presenting multiple viewpoints in class, I also prioritize including multiple voices. This includes creating syllabi comprised of diverse authors and subjects. These inclusions must be made with meaning and purpose. Some scholars address the topic of HIV solely in relation to gay men or issues of domestic violence and oppression of women in introductory anthropology classes often use readings about the Middle East. In planning how I might teach a survey of masculinities course to undergraduates, I would be sure to include representations of these issues not only with queer men and multiple global locations, but also with cis-gender heterosexual men in the United States. This serves the purpose of simultaneously preventing the localization of the issue in a single group and preventing the exoticization of the topic.

In past semesters, I noticed that students were nervous to participate in discussions. In following a Social Constructivist approach to learning, one of the ways I like to alleviate this fear early is through icebreaker activities on the first day of class. In my discussion sections for Introduction to Language, Culture, and Communication class, I would have students try to line themselves up by the last digit of their phone number, but they are not allowed to speak, draw, use their fingers, or tap out the number. This means they have to work together to find creative ways to communicate, which can often feel silly and uncomfortable, which makes asking questions and discussion participation seem more normal. I usually find after this activity students let their guards down a bit more and are more talkative and open for the rest of class period, which, when combined with frequent small group work, carries over through the rest of the semester.

Finally, I believe it is important to continually assess whether my methods are working in the classroom, aligning myself with Schön’s (1991) Reflective Teaching Practices. While facilitating classroom discussion, it is important to read the students and determine if they are getting a topic, or if I might need to slow down or double back. In addition to end of semester evaluation feedback, I conduct mid-semester assessments to ensure that I am able to address areas of need before the end of the semester.