0.1 Johnson, j., shope, s., & Roush, j. (july 2009). toward a  (Page 3/8)

There are immediate practical implications for a schooling process that honors and is attentive to these differing forms of knowledge—e.g., such a process can assist in preparing individuals to navigate the varied systems and divergent contexts that impact on their survival and well-being (Cuseo, Fecas,&Thompson, 2007). There are less direct implications, and these are implications that speak to the primary issues of power and powerlessness that we confront here. Understanding these implications necessitates a consideration of the culturalist perspective that the distribution of material goods in society and the distribution of curricular goods in schooling are related. Reflecting on that perspective, Williams (1961, p. 125) writes:

The cultural choices involved in the selection of content [will be seen to] organic relationship to the social choices involved in the practical organization of [society]. If we are to discuss education adequately, we must examine, in historical terms, this organic relation, for to be conscious of a choice made is to be conscious of further and alternative choices available.

Put simply, representation in the curriculum (i.e., officially sanctioned knowledge) mirrors social patterns of haves and have-nots. Knowledge as construed in the model proposed here works against such representations, redistributing to groups and cultures that have been excluded a place in the curriculum.

The implications for students and families in rural Appalachia (as for other marginalized groups) are enormous and far-reaching. Eagleton (1991) contends that marginalized groups must be actively taught the ideology that marginalizes them—i.e., individuals are not born with a sense of powerlessness; they learn it. Stereotypes abound, of course, and do grievous harm in this regard (consider, e.g., the film Wrong Turn [McElroy, 2003]). Such ideological teaching can take more passive approaches as well. In the context of schooling, as Williams (1961) noted, excluding a group from the curriculum (the manifestation, within schooling, of what constitutes important knowledge) is a way of teaching members of that group that they don’t matter. Reframing our understandings of knowledge to honor and integrate academic and contextual components, can work against this kind of marginalization and work toward re-positioning marginalized groups (like rural Appalachians) to a place where they share a substantive role.

The idea that knowledge as a source of power that (1) has contributed to inequitable distributions of societal goods, and (2) can be repurposed and marshaled to work against such inequitable distributions is not standard fare in most educational leadership programs. In the model described, such an understanding is crucial for effective leadership. To be successful a school leader must be able to identify the power structures and system resources available. In a region where knowledge brokers are looked at with skepticism, this is difficult work that requires skill sets and dispositions overlooked in traditional leadership models: humility, self efficacy, and a deep trust in people and their abilities.