The power of role-modelling: White teacher educators normalising anti-racism and cultural reflexivity for White pre-service teachers

ABSTRACT

Every child has a right to feel culturally safe in schools, yet for countless Indigenous students this is not the case. Many White pre-service teachers in Australia enter initial teacher education with a limited understanding of racial identity, Indigenous knowledge or White anti-racism. This autoethnographic study applies Social Cognitive Theory and the Theory of Planned Behaviour to understand the role of the White teacher educator in racial conscientisation of White pre-service teachers. We examine how White teacher confidence in enacting anti-racist behaviours builds when White teacher educators role-model the professional approaches which White teachers can use to teach about race and be culturally reflexive in K-12 classrooms. Such cultural reflexivity requires that White teachers acknowledge their positionality and make visible Indigenous cultural authority over course material. In doing so, this culturally reflexive approach provides an effective and authentic critical pedagogy for developing anti-racist conscience and practice amongst White educators.

KEYWORDS:

• Anti-racism
• Whiteness
• cultural reflexivity
• critical pedagogy
• race conscientisation
• Social Cognitive Theory

Introduction

Children have never been very good at listening to their elders, but they have never failed to imitate them. They must, they have no other models.

James Baldwin (1961)

Since colonisation, education has reinforced racialised power structures that create ongoing cultural violence against Indigenous peoples and other ethnic groups outside the White hegemony (Ladson-Billings 1998; Vass 2015). One of the mechanisms of this cultural violence is the White colonial ontologies that shape classroom socialisation processes, assimilating and dispossessing non-White students of their knowledge and cultural identities in schools (Bodkin-Andrews and Carlson 2016; Macdonald et al. 2018).

The first wave of White teacher identity studies explored the methods of resistance which teachers and systems used to avoid acknowledging their role in persistent racism (Jupp, Berry and Jupp 2017; Lensmire 2017). Within this body of work, scholars have applied various frameworks including Critical Race Theory, Interest Convergence Theory, Standpoint Theory and Critical Whiteness (Aveling 2006; Bodkin-Andrews and Carlson 2016; Brookfield 2018; Hadley 2018; Ladson-Billings 1998; Maxwell 2012; Moodie 2017; Schulz and Fane 2015; Smith and Lander 2022; Vass 2015) to provide a powerful explanation for the intransigence of racism in White institutions such as schools (Ladson-Billings 1998). As educators of race in an Indigenous Australian setting, we find that these frameworks theorise well the racial blindness and evasiveness typical to many White pre-service teachers and provided essential insights into systemic racism (Jupp, Regina Berry, and Lensmire 2016). For the three White authors of this piece, critical theories such as those above also explicate the clear boundaries on White educators in representing Indigenous and non-White experiences and identities (McGloin 2009). However, they do not fully explain the ‘teachable moments’ that occur in our classrooms nor provide pedagogical solutions for how anti-racism can be developed in White teachers. And it must be developed, for racism cannot be abolished or reduced whilst White identity remains immutably positioned in a negative or violent relationship to other identities.

James Baldwin (1998) exhorted teachers to understand their role in creating societal change, not by words and moral discourse, but actions. Teachers can be powerful models of democratic conscience and critical engagement through their choices of curriculum, pedagogy and modelling of social norms (Brookfield 2018; Giroux 1992).

Recently, researchers have begun to move on from identifying the problem of Whiteness in education, to looking for ways to increase the capacity of White pre-service and professional teachers to address issues of race in education. Such research has been coined ‘second-wave White teacher identity studies’ (Jupp, Berry and Lensmire 2017). To actively reduce the harm experienced by students of colour, teachers can employ pedagogies of ‘racial conscientisation’. These pedagogies support anti-racist approaches, and critical reflexivity regarding the way cultural and racial identities shape teachers’ work (Jupp 2017).

Racial conscientisation is a transformative learning process, where educators intentionally challenge learners to critically reflect on their positioning and beliefs, moving from problematic to inclusive understandings of themselves and others (Mezirow 2003). It is a process that works within the limitations of the current (colonial) education system to mobilise White people towards active and engaged anti-racism. If there is no activist requirement, Tuck and Yang (2012) remind us that race conscientisation becomes another ‘settler move to innocence’ (p.19), unlikely to produce material change in the Indigenous-settler coloniser relationship.

As a result of this robust requirement, where race conscientisation education is mandatory, learners can sometimes resent the expectation of enforced self-examination, demonstrating overt resistance to course content and educator knowledge (Brookfield 2018; Evans-Winters and Hines 2020; Schulz and Fane 2015). Even for learners who willingly engage in critical self-reflection, the journey of exploring one’s own racialisation is emotionally challenging, and negative emotions such as guilt, anger, shame and sadness are frequent responses within hegemonic groups (Crowley 2019; Evans-Winters and Hines 2020; Murray-García et al. 2005). Racial conscientisation is a complex, conscious, dialectic process. Racialisation, however, often occurs subversively, role-modelled constantly and effectively through actions, behaviours and conversations.

In this paper, we explore the function of White teacher educators in role-modelling anti-racism and cultural reflexivity to White pre-service teachers. In doing so, we aim to further second-wave White teacher identity studies by examining role-modelling as a critical pedagogy for anti-racism education with White pre-service teachers. Emerging literature (Luke, Miller, and Tehia 2023; Macdonald et al. 2022) suggests that those White pre-service teachers and teacher educators who are willing to do the work of anti-racism are looking for models they can follow: classroom-ready examples of culturally inclusive curriculum, pedagogical strategies and discursive techniques for promoting an inclusive and anti-racist agenda.

We present findings of a project in which we explored the ways White teacher educators used their in-group identity to increase White pre-service teacher confidence to replicate anti-racist and culturally reflexive behaviours in their future K-12 classrooms. The four authors of our paper are experienced schoolteachers and teacher educators. The first three authors are White academics who deliver an Indigenous education course as part of a team of (mostly Indigenous) academics within an Indigenous Centre at an Australian university. The fourth author is an Indigenous educator and academic with four decades’ experience, who oversaw and guided this project and more broadly, all teaching work within the Centre.

The role of White educators in ending Whiteness is a question replete with paradox, yet we must engage with this paradox if we hope to find new ways forward (Rappaport 1981). Perhaps, the most immediate issue facing White academics who teach a course on Indigenous education contexts is ensuring that they are clear on whose perspectives they present and what permissions they are granted by Indigenous experts. Additionally, there should be realistic understanding as to what can be achieved within the constraints of the teaching timetable, in our case, a thirteen-week unit of work. In pursuit of new critical directions, we remain conscious of the complexity and paradox which shape the research of White scholars, working in Eurocentric universities, teaching and studying racialisation in education from a position of racial power (McGloin 2009; Wooltorton, Poelina, and Collard 2021).

We begin by discussing the race education and Whiteness literature, with particular reflection on the work of Indigenous Australian scholars and the Australian education landscape. Having contextualised our work, we describe the research project’s origin, methodology and process for maintaining authenticity and Indigenous leadership, and finally we present the reflections which guided our findings.

Conceptualising race education in Australia

As in many colonised nations, Australian education institutions have been imbued with concepts of Whiteness from the moment of colonisation. In Tuck and Yang’s (2012) seminal essay ‘Decolonisation is not a metaphor’, the authors explain ‘the disruption of Indigenous relationships to land represents a profound epistemic, ontological, cosmological violence’. (p.5), for which the only complete solution is the legal reversal of coloniser land rights. The question of decolonisation within education is inherently complex – how can White people working in White institutions remove the impact and effects of centuries of colonisation?

We position our work within a tradition that exists within Indigenous Australian scholarship: ‘to decolonize Indigenous communities, and decenter humans for Indigenous-leadership of ecosystem restoration” (Wooltorton Poelina and Collard, 2021, 418). Within this tradition, various frameworks, including Two-way Learning, Ganma Theory, Cultural Interface and Indigenous Standpoint Theory (Nakata 2002; Purdie et al. 2011; Yunupingu et al. 1994), have been developed by Indigenous scholars who theorise new futures, via the radical re-shaping of educational institutions and coloniser identities. Certainly, the impetus for these theories has been reclamation of Indigenous rights and a need to combat the harm inflicted on Indigenous Australian youth by Eurocentric schooling. Yet, Indigenous scholars have pointed also to a broader purpose, that of bringing non-Indigenous people to an appropriate relationality with Country/Place and Indigenous Australia (Robertson et al. 2016), ‘as a framework for understanding and living in Australia, and for understanding themselves and their place in the cosmos. (Corn and Patrick 2018, 178).

Jupp (2017) explains that second-wave White teacher identity studies ‘takes seriously and emphasises previous undervalued directions in critical race and whiteness pedagogies’ (p.18). In exploring new directions, we remain conscious that colonisers are notorious for shape-shifting, for finding new ways to assimilate (Kidman, Ormond, and MacDonald 2018). The traditions of epistemological duality and synergy developed by Indigenous scholars that we discussed above, are not equivocations for assimilation. Through these Indigenous-led frameworks we explore mechanisms for subverting the processes which have reproduced White racism so effectively (Bobo and Fox 2003).

The Australian teacher education landscape

In a country where just over 5% of schoolchildren and only 2% of schoolteachers and academics identify as Indigenous (Australian Council of Deans of Education 2017), population demographics provide a uniquely challenging landscape for race-visible education. In many Australian classrooms, the teaching of Indigenous perspectives and knowledge, as well as teaching for anti-racism, occurs in education spaces where the main educator is not Indigenous, and usually White. Most educators have themselves come through a school system which silenced Indigenous knowledge, de-valued Indigenous cultural norms (Macdonald, Gringart, and Gray 2016) and still treats Indigenous knowledge as an ‘add-on’ to the expected curriculum rather than integral to education (Macdonald et al. 2022; Maxwell, Lowe, and Salter 2018). Due to population demographics, it remains common for initial teacher education programmes to employ a mix of non-Indigenous and Indigenous educators to present essential learning regarding Indigenous ontologies, histories and cultures, as well as examining educational Whiteness, racism and colonisation (Jackson et al. 2013; Macdonald et al. 2022).

In recent years, Australian education policy has increasingly made explicit the professional responsibilities of all schoolteachers and teacher educators towards Indigenous students and communities. From policies in Higher Education (Universities Australia 2016) to the Australian school curriculum (ACARA n.d.), Professional Teacher Standards (AITSL 2018, 2011) and the Early Years Learning Framework (DEEWR 2009), policies describe an aspirational goal that in Australia, all educators will teach for anti-racism, reduce discrimination and promote reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia through the incorporation of Indigenous perspectives in curriculum for all students (AITSL 2018). Certainly, governments and education institutions have not envisioned the totality of ontological change required for this to occur, yet the accreditation criteria for initial teacher education programmes in Australia explicitly require that pre-service teachers demonstrate understanding of:

• what constitutes racism and anti-racism strategies, policies and legislation

• what it means to act in culturally appropriate/inclusive ways

• what cultural safety and inclusivity are

(AITSL 2018, 7)

That is, initial teacher education courses should not only teach pre-service teachers about race, and Indigenous knowledge, but they should teach pre-service teachers how they can appropriately teach about race, and Indigenous knowledge, to all Australian children (AITSL 2018). Within this paper, we explore the function of White educator role-modelling in ensuring White and non-Indigenous pre-service teachers meet these requirements.

In Australia, White and other non-Indigenous pre-service teachers often have limited experiences with Indigenous peoples, building their schemas of Indigenous people and issues by proxy through messages passed on by media and White sources. In order to cultivate the unlearning of racism and misconceptions, pre-service teachers experience greatest educational benefit from the opportunity to develop relationships with, and have learning experiences led by, Indigenous teacher educators (Jackson et al. 2013; Macdonald et al. 2022).

Yet, the population differential between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia creates unique challenges for Indigenous academics who do this work. In classrooms where (almost) all learners are non-Indigenous, there are explicit pressures on Indigenous academics who are at once both the teacher and the object being studied by their non-Indigenous students (Jackson et al. 2013). Asmar and Page (2009) found that 50% of Indigenous Australian academics who talked about stressful aspects of their job explicitly discussed the stress of teaching resistant and sometimes openly hostile learners. The cause of this stress went beyond learner hostility, to the emotional exhaustion of teaching the national history of dispossession and genocide, which is not removed, but exists in personal and ongoing experiences of Indigenous lecturers and their families (Asmar and Page 2009).

For non-Indigenous academics who work in this space, there is a clear and necessary onus to work in a way that respects the agency, autonomy and scholarly leadership of Indigenous academics. Our research has previously demonstrated that so long as Indigenous leadership, representation and cultural authority over course material is visible, learners express confidence in the authenticity of such a course even when primarily (though not solely) taught by non-Indigenous educators (Macdonald et al. 2022).

Within our own Centre, the Indigenous education course for pre-service teachers has been developed by a team of academics who are former schoolteachers. All senior positions on this team are held by Indigenous educators, and approximately 40% of the face-to-face teaching is conducted by Indigenous academics, with all final decisions regarding the course materials, pedagogical approaches and staffing, made by this senior Indigenous group. MacDonald, Booth and Mills have each worked for five or more years within this Centre, much of this time under the leadership of Somerville, delivering the course to a pre-dominantly White and non-Indigenous learner cohort. It is within this demographic space and conceptual landscape, that the current project was conceptualised by the three White authors under guidance of the fourth, Indigenous author.

Developing our knowledge through a race-visible method

The project was designed as an autoethnography, to explore the pedagogies and positionalities which enabled White teacher educators to establish authentic learning on Indigenous and race education concepts. ‘When researchers do autoethnography, they retrospectively and selectively write about epiphanies that stem from, or are made possible by, being part of a culture and/or by possessing a particular cultural identity’ (Ellis, Adams and Bochner 2011, 276). The choice of autoethnography, with its focus on experiential storytelling and participant action, was chosen to reflect two key themes within Indigenous and decolonising epistemologies: the contextual relationality between knower and what is known and the requirement for activism in research translation (Moodie 2017). Struthers (2014) notes that the reflective and reflexive nature of autoethnographic research can be transformative for those taking part. This was certainly the case in our own study, as the process of analysing our experience, exploring the literature and cycling deeper through discussion and literature, uncovered understandings that have shaped anew our ongoing praxis.

The initial data collection involved a round table discussion between the three White authors, reflecting on selected questions about the unit we teach. The questions were designed to elicit reflection on how non-Indigenous lecturers find authenticity when teaching Indigenous studies and what were perceived to be the most powerful learning moments experienced by White teacher educators working with White pre-service teachers.

Through the themes of Respecting Indigenous Authority by Role-Modelling Cultural Reflexivity, and Role-Modelling Anti-racism, our overarching research question was: How does the identity of White educators provide opportunities and place boundaries on the teaching of Indigenous knowledge and anti-racism to White pre-service teachers?

Although White identities were at the centre of the research, we looked for ways to ensure Indigenous authority over the Indigenous representations discussed in this work (Moodie 2017). As a condition of support for the project, Somerville maintained an expectation that draft findings would be presented to Indigenous academics within our Centre for feedback and further consideration, before publication and wider dissemination.

After collectively exploring the themes arising from the literature and our autoethnographic discussions, we presented the findings on two occasions to our Indigenous and non-Indigenous colleagues who teach Indigenous studies at our University. The first discussion group consisted of an initial presentation of the research and open feedback within an academic team meeting of five Indigenous and four non-Indigenous colleagues. This led to a second, more in-depth, round-table and discussion held over two hours between the three non-Indigenous authors and seven of the Indigenous academics in our Centre, four of whom held more senior positions within the University, including Somerville as the Head of Teaching and Learning.

During that discussion, the Indigenous academics reiterated the essential nature of Indigenous authority and leadership that is fundamental to decolonising spaces (Moodie 2017), and examined both the findings, and methodologies through which they were obtained. Within these discussions, the Indigenous academics acknowledged both the complexity and essential nature of non-Indigenous teacher educators in role-modelling culturally responsive teaching practice to learners, in recognition of the White socialisation practices that White learners experience outside our courses.

As with the work of other White scholars in this space (Smith and Redington 2010), the integrity of this research was dependent on authentic engagement with feedback from Indigenous managers, academic colleagues and pre-service teachers rather than through the responses of non-Indigenous learners or colleagues. This being said, it felt no small thing to put this research so explicitly under the academic microscope of peer review by our colleagues and superiors, and reminded each of the non-Indigenous authors of the personal commitment to respecting Indigenous cultural authority that is essential to working in this space.

Having obtained confirmation that the findings of this research had the support of the Indigenous experts in our own academic community, we present the findings to a wider audience for reflection. Here, we utilise the same discursive manner which guided the research, weaving together personal narrative and theory under the two key themes: Respecting Indigenous Authority by Role-Modelling Cultural Reflexivity, and Role-modelling Anti-racism.

While in the present article we discuss the educative value of the non-Indigenous educators’ in-group role, we also recognise that the non-Indigenous reflexive voice in this space is rendered colonialist if learners do not have genuine and frequent opportunities to engage with Indigenous educational leaders. Such experiences remain the most essential part of an Indigenous education course such as that we teach in to.

Theorising the contribution of White educators in role-modelling anti-racism

Scholars of Critical Whiteness Studies have identified two broad methods by which White racialisation is experienced and reproduced. One is the normalisation, centring and invisibility of Whiteness that occurs both in Australia and globally (Copenhaver-Johnson 2006; Hadley 2018; Schulz and Fane 2015). Through this process, White people are socialised to believe that they are somehow a-racial, and that their norms are global norms for which other races are somehow aberrant. Somewhat paradoxically, although the White Self is rarely mentioned, the non-White Other is constantly made visible and used as a counterpoint for White racial bonding processes through in-group micro-affirmations (MacDonald, Smith, and Funaki 2021; Vass 2017).

The second racialisation process at hand, is the active use of negative reinforcement within White society when Whites engage overtly with race. Crowley (2019) calls this ‘policing of whiteness’, the use of negative in-group socialisation such as disapproval, fear and scorn, to reinforce the understanding that their own (because White is unnamed) group must avoid overt support for other races, and remain silent and ‘wilfully blind’ regarding White identity and White racism. Such ‘policing’ teaches Whites that because race is not a relevant aspect of White identity, therefore, White people (including educators) have no role to play in race discourse (Hadley 2018; Schulz and Fane 2015).

Bobo and Fox (2003), writing two decades ago, identified that as issues of race, racism and discrimination are primarily issues of group identification and behaviours, then social psychology provides important understandings of how racial prejudices are learned, and can be unlearned. The field of psychology has been rightly critiqued by scholars of colour for scientific racism inherent in the assumption that what is normal or desirable within White-led/participant research, must be normal or desirable within non-White cultural groups (Thomas, McKinney de Royston, and Powell 2023). Furthermore, scientific theories which reduce individuals to discrete objects, disconnected from their context, are ontologically opposed to Indigenous understandings of self (Macdonald et al. 2022; Thomas, McKinney de Royston, and Powell 2023) We suggest there remains nuance. There are psychological theories of learning developed in Western science which position the learner holistically, intrinsically linked to their social environment. When applied to behavioural learning amongst White people in a course on Indigenous studies, these theories might be well placed to explore the role of White socialisation processes in producing anti-racism and cultural reflexivity.

Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) emphasise the importance of social contexts in behavioural learning (Ajzen 2005; Schunk 2014). Social Cognitive Theory explains that social behaviours are often learned by observation. A learner who observes someone modelling a behaviour in a manner that appears to have successful outcomes, is likely to later repeat that behaviour themselves (Schunk 2014). Similarly, a learner who observes someone modelling a behaviour that appears to have negative outcomes, is less likely to later repeat that behaviour themselves. The Theory of Planned Behaviour builds on SCT to explain that it is the outcomes observed within the in-group which most strongly influence behaviour (Ajzen, 2005). In a world where White reflexivity and anti-racism are not well known (Smith and Redington 2010), TPB supports the notion that White pre-service and professional teachers will be most likely to engage in culturally reflexive and anti-racist behaviour if they perceive these behaviours are a normal part of White teacher identity.

We suggest that SCT provides a critical pedagogical framework for White educators of anti-racism who work with White learners. These educators can provide visible models of successful outcomes for Whites who de-silence race and de-centre Whiteness, in turn making these behaviours more likely to be replicated.

Indigenous ontologies, positionality and anti-racism within our teacher education course

The course we teach begins by acknowledging that Indigenous Australian epistemologies, ontologies and theories of education have a history in the tens of thousands of years. Acknowledging this deep history is central to a Place-responsive future for Australian education (Macdonald et al. 2022). The course details cultural, structural and historical phenomena of racism (MacDonald, Smith and Funaki 2021, Luke, Miller, and Tehia 2023). The course further interrogates the educational advantage conferred on White students through Anglocentric curriculum, language, pedagogical tools, behavioural norms and authority structures.

Alongside this understanding, the course focuses on practical skills that enable non-Indigenous teachers to exhibit an Indigenous-centred relationality with Country/Place and Indigenous Australia (Corn and Patrick 2018; Robertson et al. 2016). These skills include curriculum planning, teacher positioning, culturally responsive pedagogies and enactment of anti-racism. It is these aspects, the ‘how’ rather than the ‘what’ and the ‘why’, which present opportunities for White teacher educators to authentically contribute by modelling and normalising White teacher anti-racism.

Respecting Indigenous authority by role-modelling cultural reflexivity

All cultures hold sovereign authority over their cultural expressions, standpoints and knowledge, including the right to self-determine their identity and its representations (Jones and Kuni 2008; Moodie 2017). Within our research, ‘Respecting Indigenous Authority by Role-Modelling Cultural Reflexivity’ was described as occurring when educators made explicit their own racial positionality in relation to Indigenous knowledge. The first aspect of this role-modelling, is to reinforce that all non-Indigenous educators are learners in this space, needing to respect Indigenous communities and academics as the knowledge holders and authorities on Indigenous issues.

Even so, at times, there existed an inescapable tension for the non-Indigenous authors where we found ourselves discussing Indigenous-produced resources regarding Indigenous ways of being, and ways of knowing, with an (often) entirely non-Indigenous class. One author, Macdonald, explained her perspective that the most authentic approach was to acknowledge the realities of the Australian demographic, and to engage non-Indigenous pre-service teachers in critical dialogue regarding how they themselves will meet Australian Curriculum requirements of incorporating Indigenous knowledge in their own classrooms. The aim of this approach was to acknowledge that for non-Indigenous educators who wish to teach the curriculum authentically and critically, the tension of Self and Other within curriculum should be openly discussed. We aim for our pre-service teachers to recognise that the complex, multi-layered landscape of positionality will always shape their educative work and to embracing the creative complexities held within this space whilst simultaneously recognising the limits on their ability to represent the perspectives of another (Jones and Kuni 2008; Schulz and Fane 2015). Through this critical pedagogy (Giroux 1992; Milner 2003), non-Indigenous educators can privilege non-hegemonic worldviews and enact a new, de-colonial way for non-Indigenous peoples to relate to Indigenous peoples and to Place (Wooltorton, Poelina and Collard, 2021).

During data-gathering, the three non-Indigenous authors identify three course topics, which we felt our identities as White educators provided the most educative integrity. These were History, Racism and Teaching Indigenous curriculum to non-Indigenous students. In these topics, course materials present first-hand narratives of Indigenous experience, from the initial massacres and land dispossession, through to civil rights fights and the Stolen Generations, and ongoing institutional racism enacted on families by education, health and justice systems. Working alongside Indigenous narratives, White lecturers present an in-group analysis of the narratives and microaffirmations extant in contemporary White socialisation processes (MacDonald, Smith, and Funaki 2021; Vass 2017) that reproduce the systemic racism that harms Indigenous families today. In doing so, we aim to explicate for students the ways in which racialisation processes evident in conversations, curriculum materials, pedagogical and classroom management structures cannot be divorced from the systemic racism affecting socioeconomic outcomes of education, health and mortality.

Booth explained her approach in this way:

We always talk about narrative. All pre-service teachers need to hear personal narrative from Indigenous people throughout this course… But the crux of the History topic is also to get students examining national identity narratives, and those things come back to analysing Whiteness. Which means I feel there is a great deal of authenticity in a White educator teaching this aspect of the course from a reflexive positioning. Whereas there are other aspects of the course that I think would have less integrity if I was the key lecturer for those topics.

Macdonald followed up by discussing the lecture on racism.

I remember a couple of years ago, when we first decided to explicitly teach about racism in the course. The key proponent of that shift was an Indigenous colleague who simply said, our students need to hear a non-Indigenous person talking about race, so that they get, that non-Indigenous people need to talk about race. That conversation has shored me up every time I have done the racism lecture … I feel that it is the part of the course … that allows me to use my position as a non-Indigenous person to most value. In that topic I don’t have to worry about whether I have misappropriated or misrepresented another people’s knowledge. Because in the racism topic, I am talking to teachers about the ways of being and thinking in my own group of people, and getting teachers from my own ethnic group to interrogate our worldviews, and socialisation, and to really hear what other groups are saying.

Mills, who had worked as a language teacher in schools, further explained the use of in-group knowledge and behavioural modelling as a tool in critical pedagogy:

I’ll use an analogy to language teaching. People ask the question ‘why do you teach Indonesian if you are not Indonesian?’ When I did the methodology unit in my course, we learned that as a non-native speaker, you are better positioned to see the pitfalls of language learning, for other non-native speakers who are from the same language group as yourself. ie. English speakers tend to all make the same mistakes when learning Indonesian. So to transfer that across, as a White educator, I feel that because so many of our pre-service teachers are White, I feel like I am positioned well to understand why they think a certain way. Because I have been through that learning journey myself.

Each non-Indigenous author keenly felt a constant anxiety and tension of critical self-reflection, as well as the guilt inherent in awareness of unearned privilege, which has been discussed by many other White educators of race (Aveling 2006; Hadley 2018; Schulz and Fane 2015; Smith and Redington 2010). Yet, we also consider that holding back, leaving discussion of race to only Indigenous lecturers, normalises a White assumption that race is not relevant to all peoples and can be ignored by White teachers (Schulz and Fane 2015). In our own author discussions, we also expressed the same beliefs, with Mills stating:

I think there is a lot of power in role-modelling that non-Indigenous people are meant to talk about these issues… There are really clear limits on what a non-Indigenous person has the right or even the knowledge to speak about, but to just ‘leave everything Indigenous to Indigenous people’, sends an implicit message to non-Indigenous pre-service teachers that there isn’t anything they should try to engage with when they become practitioners. And then they think that issues like racism, are just Indigenous issues.

As part of modelling cultural reflexivity, we aim to avoid those oppositional binaries that contribute to racial ignorance by denying the complexity of identity (Giroux 1992; Lensmire 2017). As an example, early in our course, pre-service teachers are provided with autobiographical stimulus texts where Indigenous authors recount their experiences of racism and explain how these experiences shaped their identity and their engagement at school. The pre-service teachers are tasked with reflecting on these texts in three ways; 1) how their own and their families’ experiences of school and government authority are similar or different to those in the texts, 2) how the narratives in the text reveal the impact of systemic, multigenerational racism on contemporary Indigenous students’ education experiences and 3) the practical strategies that an anti-racist teacher can utilise to meet their professional responsibilities towards Indigenous students. The three questions achieve three aims. By allowing pre-service teachers to explore both what is similar and what is different between their own family history and those in the stimulus texts, the first task de-essentialises concepts of what it means to be White, or to be Indigenous. Some of the most powerful reflections on similarity of experience have come from White pre-service teachers whose family experienced racial genocides such as the Holocaust, or immigrant pre-service teachers whose family members were denied an education due to ethnicity, gender, poverty, or religion. These pre-service teachers accurately identify the racial violence in Australian history by finding the echoes of other tragedies that have had similarly profound impacts on entire social groups.

The second question then allows pre-service teachers to examine the role of education in reinforcing racial privilege and racial oppression across generations, that is, to engage with a critical theorist framework of education via examination of personal narratives. Finally, by turning this narrative reflection towards a discussion of professional responsibilities, we apply a transformative pedagogy aiming to engage pre-service teachers with imagining a new identity – that of the proactively anti-racist educator. Through this autobiographical and narrative approach, race is made visible and cultural reflexivity normalised (Jupp, Regina Berry, and Lensmire 2016). The assessment has been crafted to be of educational value for all learners, including Indigenous and other non-White pre-service teachers, but we have been encouraged at the successfulness of this assessment in developing White pre-service teachers’ critical consciousness of race in education and understanding of practical anti-racism. This leads to the second aspect of our teaching that became a strong theme of our research, the teaching and role-modelling of proactive White anti-racism as a core component of our work.

Role-modelling White anti-racism

As racism is ultimately a problem produced by the White hegemony, there is an ethical responsibility for White educators to engage in the ‘heavy lifting’ of practising and teaching anti-racism (Evans-Winters and Hines 2020; Jackson et al. 2013; Jupp 2017). Smith and Redington (2010) argued that the existence of White anti-racists is not common knowledge, and Crowley (2019) highlighted that the ‘policing of Whiteness’ teaches Whites that any discussion of race, and White identity, will always focus on negative aspects of that identity. The result of this socialisation is that White people expect negative consequences if they engage in making White identity visible.

Baldwin (1998, 203) wrote that although education may aim to produce people who can critique society, ‘… no society is really anxious to have that kind of person around’. In a White hegemony, even White middle-class educators can be disempowered by the system which acts to silence dissenting voices (Giroux 1992). A critical pedagogy must serve to circumvent the system, and one way to do so is by normalising anti-racism as a part of White identity (Murray-García et al. 2005).

Comparing those perceptions of racial discourse that are typically socialised in White society, with the framework of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen 2005), it becomes apparent that creating anti-racist White teachers requires a re-socialisation of their in-group norms and expectations. Many White pre-service teachers enter teacher education without the skills or vocabulary to discuss and examine race as it has not been part of their socialisation (Crowley 2019; Lensmire 2017). In our own courses, many White pre-service teachers speak of being opposed to racism, but express concern that engaging in anti-racism may not be received positively either by their own in-group or by people of other races.

The literature is clear that White learners can often be surprisingly frank when speaking about race with White researchers and lecturers (Crowley 2019; Schulz and Fane 2015), often admitting their fear of discussing race and racialised experiences with those of other ethnic groups. White learners sometimes admit to being afraid that they will appear racist (which in truth, they often may appear so), or ignorant and unlearned on the topic, or that they will be labelled and scapegoated as either ‘racist’ or ‘not anti-racist enough’ (Brookfield 2018; Copenhaver-Johnson 2006; Crowley 2019; Lensmire 2017; Schulz and Fane 2015).

This is not to say that White learners cannot discuss race openly and critically in front of non-White peoples (Milner 2003; Yancy 2018), rather, that in-group socialisation could be a powerful tool for normalising White anti-racism. During data collection, each White author identified that White pre-service teachers appeared to seek out our insider knowledge of White anti-racism in all-White social settings, in order to get advice as to how they could address the everyday racism that goes on in many White social spaces.

As Macdonald explained,

I find that quite frequently, White pre-service teachers will stay back after class to tell me about a conversation they have been privy to, that they thought was really racist. And they will ask for advice about how they should respond to these situations. I think they are voicing ‘Hey, I agree with what you’re teaching, but what are the words I am meant to use?’, It may sound silly, but even though they are uncomfortable with racism, they don’t have any playbook on how White people are meant to be anti-racist, because they don’t ever experience those conversations within their own in-group. Not in their social network, and not in the media. And even more so, they know there will be social costs involved. So they want to know whether there can be positive outcomes as well as negative consequences for speaking out against racism.

As White lecturers, we identified the importance of role-modelling these behaviours as normative, expected behaviours for White teachers, and as something at which pre-service teachers could expect to progress their competence in, and importantly, to expect positive results from. We applied this approach, substantiated through the Theory of Planned Behaviour, by focusing on the professional responsibilities of a teacher in addressing racism. We also presented anecdotes from our own experiences as White teachers, normalising the identity of the White anti-racist educator in the classroom and staffroom. In this manner, we deliberately disrupt the White pre-service teachers’ belief that resistance to Indigenous knowledge and perspectives can be assumed as a source of bonding with other White teachers (MacDonald, Smith, and Funaki 2021; Vass 2017).

By exposing pre-service teachers to situations where they can develop the language and skills of anti-racism, we aim to encourage a self-regulated, or internalised, approach to anti-racism, and build self-efficacy (Schunk 2014). In this, our focus is not on those pre-service teachers who appear to be staunchly racist, but on those who are supportive of anti-racism, but lack the skills or confidence to engage. Booth provided these insights to this approach:

I think you can’t force people to self-reflect anyway in a mandatory course, if they are not ready for that. But there are those whose minds might be [changed] … by saying ‘this is something you will need to address in your own classes, so think about how you will build an anti-racist classroom’. When discussing White privilege, we give pre-service teachers the opportunity to see themselves as being part of the solution.

Macdonald added:

‘Sometimes, pre-service teachers are afraid of engaging with anti-racism or Indigenous curriculum, because they fear that if they get it wrong it will be hugely costly to their career and professional relationships, and especially to Indigenous students. So what we are trying to do, is to help White pre-service teachers navigate expectations, to realise that negative reactions in “real life” can be addressed professionally and through relationships, and through an ongoing journey towards competency. Hence, they want to hear from educators who aren’t Indigenous, about how to navigate this space constructively’.

In Smith and Redington’s (2010) study, participants discussed the value of showing ‘respect for people at any level of awareness’ as part of a transformative approach (Smith and Redington 2010). That is, the White anti-racists in that study made a point of ensuring that engaging others in race discussion and self-reflection remained a positive experience, even when the discussion indicated that some group members had very limited capacity for self-reflexivity.

The critical aspect of such methodology is that this respect does not become an excuse to shy away from confronting toxic racism. Rather, it is part of a broader recognition that racial identity development is a destabilising experience, and that negative reactions may be typical, without being the endpoint of a learner’s journey. Mezirow (2003) identifies that transformative learning requires critical dialectic discourse, and that people can only freely engage in this form of discourse when they do not feel intimidated or under threat.

Perhaps because the costs of mistakes can be so high, White teachers who aspire to anti-racism can be afraid of their own ignorance. In some ways, the advice we provide to pre-service teachers boils down to the simple but essential humility required to improve practice in all areas of teaching, including anti-racism, perhaps best put by Paulo Freire ‘No one knows it all; no one is ignorant of everything.’ (reproduced in Freire et al. 2008, 208).

Hence, as White academics, we aimed to normalise for White pre-service teachers the journey of critical self-reflection, evaluation of our own socialisation and positionality, engagement with different praxes, decolonisation of White narratives, learning from Indigenous practitioners, making missteps and apologising, and continuing the learning journey.

In this last aspect, we authors are less confident. As Mills explained:

We pretend to our pre-service teachers that it is a comfortable, safe position to be a self-reflective being, who is attempting to dismantle one’s own source of privilege. We pretend this, because we hope that these pre-service teachers will also engage in self-reflection, and in the dismantling of White privilege and creation of a more equitable world. So in a way we don’t want them to realise that it is actually incredibly hard, it is destabilising to your own sense of certainty in identity, and an emotional and sometimes distressing experience to give up your privilege by opening yourself up to critical feedback. At least, we don’t want them to realise that too early on in the journey!

Conclusion

Brookfield (2018) wrote that the ontology of teaching race is such that the teacher always feels out of their depth. He cites one colleague as saying ‘There are two ways to teach about race – badly, or not at all’ (Lucia Pawlowski, quoted in Brookfield 2018, 15). The same may be true for writing about race.

As teacher educators who role model a reflexive White teacher identity, we are fortunate to be able to build upon a solid foundation provided by first-wave White teacher identity scholars who have applied critical race theory to understand the structures of Whiteness in education. We work with Indigenous scholars to a future where White teachers are racially conscientious and provide culturally reflexive modelling in their K-12 classrooms as a normative process. By bringing this consciousness to the fore, we hope to break the cycle of White blindness and silence around race and racism and pave the way for social change.

The contribution of White educators to race education is bound by accountability to Black, Indigenous and People of Colour communities. The ongoing layers of institutional and interpersonal racism at play in the lives of our colleagues, students and wider communities provide impetus for us to contribute actively and authentically to decolonisation of education at every level. We acknowledge that the approach outlined here operates within existing education structures. True decolonisation requires transformation even of these structures in ways that radically reshape not only educational institutions but coloniser identities for lasting change in Indigenous and non-Indigenous lives.

Both Social Cognitive Theory and the Theory of Planned Behaviour substantiate role-modelling as a critical pedagogy for developing anti-racism. As White educators, we provide learners with a White anti-racist socialisation and narrative, using our ‘insider’ role to give learners insight into the positive outcomes that can be achieved through culturally reflexive White behaviours, explicitly role-modelling the language and behaviours that pre-service teachers can use when respecting Indigenous peoples and protocols, and envisioning a new relationship between non-Indigenous peoples and Place. Realising that to look forward can appear ‘not anti-racist enough’ we aim to remain critically reflective and attempt a deliberate ‘border crossing’ (Giroux 1992) to create a new paradigm responsive to the needs of tomorrow.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).