Ok a little rant on creating 'Classroom Treaties'...
So, as an educator (teacher and tutor) - I've been working with adults in initial teacher training education for a few years now (while studying for my Masters and currently in Gisborne) and this idea of 'classroom treaties' where teachers use it as a behaviour management strategy has caused within me for a few years, some frustration and ‘emotions'...
NOW, after all of these years I can verbalise these feelings and come to somewhat of a conclusion:
Firstly, Why classroom Treaty? Is it one way of getting around calling it 'Class rules?' OR is it to bring to the conscience of our students mind the Treaty of Waitangi - an agreement between the sovereign chiefs of New Zealand and the British crown (for those international readers - LoL! Of which there might be NONE - please see the following site for further information: http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/treaty-of-waitangi and http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/timeline/13/10 ).
Second, who creates this classroom treaty? (students & teacher - you say?) Why of course.. However, "generally speaking" who maintains ultimate power in this classroom setting? The teacher. Is there an opportunity for BOTH student and teacher to hold equal power in a classroom? Debatable, I would tend to say 'no’. Unless, there is a school-wide movement towards this ideal.
Third, back to the Treaty of Waitangi - the main question at the forefront of my mind is 'Who has maintained ultimate power of Āotearoa?' the New Zealand Government (British Crown) So, if the Treaty of Waitangi has and continues to work against the one partner of the treaty, what then are we teaching our children about treaties when we create classroom treaties?
Unless Fourth, we're NOT really teaching our students about the Treaty of Waitangi? I've seen ‘Classroom Treaty’ used as a strategy some teacher training students AND experienced teachers use as a behaviour management strategy in the classroom, what I haven't heard is the 'Why the word, treaty'?
Because finally, REALLY teaching what a treaty is, especially through-out history of the world would mean teaching our students that historically treaties were created and then broken by the hand in power - For example: First Nations people of Canada have historically signed MANY treaties "an agreement" - ALL that have NOT been kept by the hand in power; Māori and the British Crown, again an "agreement" NOT kept by the hand in power.
Really teaching our children in New Zealand about the Treaty of Waitangi - as an "agreement" made between the British Crown and Māori chief's of Āotearoa - and how it has and continues to be breached by the Crown would mean really looking into New Zealand history, the good, the bad and the ugly - and bringing those thoughts to fore-front of the minds of our future leaders.
In conclusion, if you're defining 'classroom treaty' as 'classroom agreement' just use 'Classroom Agreement' - Juliet is famous for saying 'What is in a name?'... The word and term 'Treaty' has for too many people meant the beginning of a process leading to language and cultural identity loss (and identity rejection), it has for many people been the foundation on which formed policies and law meant only to steal and take land, to imprison and to beat ancestors, to keep us from helping others & taught us to start thinking only of self (colonisation).
I'd like to think that at the heart of this idea 'Classroom Treaty' is a desire to become more bicultural - so I suggest that instead of using the term treaty - use 'Classroom kawa' (Customs of the marae and wharenui OR classroom) or 'Classroom tīkanga' (correct procedure, custom, method, manner, rule) instead.
Kia kaha tātou & I hope this make some sense to someone...
Share your whākaaro - all are welcome!
(except the dumb ones - LoL!)
Parns
