Grappling with social justice: Exploring new teachers’ practice and experiences

Communities of practice

According to Wenger (1998), a community of practice is defined as a group of people who share a history of experience. More experienced members (‘old timers’) represent this history and serve to disseminate this knowledge to new members (‘newcomers’). Of course, not all new members share a common trajectory with existing members and may, in fact, wish to offer new insights, discourses and ways of being within the community of practice. As Wenger notes, this negotiation of meaning has the potential to create rich opportunities for forming new identities (for both the individuals and the community) based on combining the experiential knowledge of old timers and the fresh insights of newcomers. However, this negotiation of ideas and knowledge can create tensions resulting in a repositioning of members, or adjustments of the characteristics defining the community of practice. Furthermore, competence within a community further defines membership and, consequently, further defines one’s identity within that community. This competence, or incompetence, as determined by position within the community, can leave members feeling included or marginalized.

Applied to new teachers, one can imagine that they might experience feelings of incompetence, whether grounded or not, that often leave them hovering around the margins of the community of teachers in which they practice. A strong desire to be accepted into the community could, in fact, propel novice teachers to improvise practice and, at times, abandon their own belief in themselves or their practice to adopt the authoritative discourses in place. Working contrary to these dominant voices and authoritative discourses, novice teachers may find themselves further alienated and relegated to the outer margins of the community.

Professional knowledge landscapes

As teacher educators, Clandinin and Connelly (1995), explore the process of induction into teaching by examining the narratives and experiences of teachers as they begin their careers. They propose a framework for studying induction based on the metaphor of professional knowledge landscapes, which refers to the complex layers of teachers’ professional lives. In this framework, knowledge includes meanings, beliefs and understandings that have arisen from life experience and are expressed in a person’s practice. This kind of knowledge is a result of circumstances, choices and actions that have shaped who a person is or is becoming. Practice, therefore, is a component of personal practical knowledge.

Noting that teachers spend part of their time in classrooms and part of their time in professional, communal places with people other than their students, Clandinin and Connelly (1995) look at the relationship between the ways teachers live in their classrooms and how they live in other professional places. This ‘split existence’ (2005: 5) often creates tensions and epistemological dilemmas for teachers as they navigate between the different spaces of the landscape. Dilemmas unearthed by these authors relate to the professional environment in which teachers are constantly confronted with the conflicting claims of theory and practice. Competitions between theory and practice are further complicated as theory becomes stripped of its intent and is packaged in teacher’s textbooks, curriculum resources and professional development seminars. This dilemma is further exacerbated when new teachers enter the profession and try to make sense of the barrage of information funneled into the landscape from what Clandinin and Connelly metaphorically refer to as ‘the conduit’. Once brought into the landscape, the material is afforded a certain weight of authority and has the potential to influence teachers’ practice.

Clandinin and Connelly (1995) caution that as a result, the material delivered by the conduit leaves little room for personal histories, diverse identities and critical practice to emerge. For this reason, they suggest that there are few places in the landscape (and few places within schools and classrooms) for teachers to tell and retell their personal and professional stories, thus few opportunities for personal and professional transformation. They contend that in order for transformation to occur, teachers need safe places in which to engage in conversations with others about struggles and challenges; places where stories are shared, reflected back, recounted in different ways and relived. These researchers note that, unfortunately, fear of public scrutiny compels teachers to retell experiences that show them to be competent and expert professionals. In a sense, by improvising and acting as though they are competent experts, they create plausible façades or ‘cover stories’ to hide their insecurities and uncertainties. For novice teachers, clutching newly assigned degrees and teaching certifications, these issues are further exacerbated as they move into the professional knowledge landscape with notions that these documents somehow hold a mythological power suggesting competence. And because there are few safe places to actually drop the veils of false competence, novice teachers often feel further isolated and reluctant to portray themselves as struggling.

Educational discourses on social justice

To complicate matters further for new teachers, those who seek information on social justice to inform their practice discover that the educational discourses on this issue are opaque and sometimes contradictory. Indeed, as Villegas (2007: 370) claims, social justice education is often viewed as an ‘ambiguous and ideologically loaded term fraught with potential for abuse’. Although this may be true, as a means of interpreting and understanding social justice, we highlight some of the key ideals that have been woven in various theories and ideologies.

The ideals of social justice education have been referred to as: culturally relevant teaching (Ladson-Billings, 1994); teaching against the grain (Cochran-Smith, 2004); improving the life chances of all children (Shakman et al., 2007); teaching for diversity (Zeichner, 1996); multicultural education (Sleeter and Grant, 2007); antiopressive education (Kumashiro, 2000); and addressing generic issues influenced by privilege and power (Adams, 2000). Shakman et al. (2007: 7) note that, although social justice education has been defined in various ways, the most widely held definitions share commonalities in an ‘explicit recognition of the marked disparities in educational opportunities, resources, achievement, and long-term outcomes among minority and low-income pupil groups and their white, middle-class peers’.

Shakman et al. (2007: 7) contend that teachers have the potential to be ‘both educators and activists committed to the democratic ideal’. However, according to D’Souza et al. (2007) and Shakman et al., the notion that teachers should be prepared for teaching social justice is widely critiqued by parties both within and outside of teacher education. According to these researchers, the most popular criticisms include: (1) vagueness surrounding definitions of social justice; (2) lack of attention to underlying assumptions and historical traditions; (3) its ‘touchy-feely’ focus on teachers being ‘nice’ to pupils, on building self-esteem and cultural identity without teaching skills and knowledge necessary for performing well on tests and joining the workforce; and (4) promoting ‘progressive political activism and other actions fraught with contested ideological significance’ (p. 8). Although contentious, the discourses on social justice education have stimulated critical dialogue about the implications for teaching in today’s diverse and ever-changing societies. Moreover, the predominantly American discourse has become a springboard for critical dialogue about social justice education in Canada and other international settings.

A Canadian/British Columbian context and perspective

In the recent years, a similar discourse about democracy and citizenship has emerged in the province of British Columbia (BC). The BC discussion began as a response to Cogan and Kubow’s (1997) contention that schools were no longer explicitly addressing their obligation to prepare socially responsible citizens and social responsibility had not been given precedence within school curricula. ¹

As a result, selected teachers, administrators and students collaborated with the government to develop a ‘framework of expectations’ that were presented as performance standards to measure pupils’ ability to contribute to the class and school community, solve problems peacefully, value diversity and defend human rights, democratic principles and responsibilities (Government of British Columbia, 2001). To ensure accountability, students were rated in each area as ‘not yet within expectations; meets expectations (minimal level); fully meets expectations; or exceeds expectations’ (Government of British Columbia, 2001: 9).

In our experience as a former public school teachers, social responsibility as it is enacted in BC is more of a soft approach, or ‘touchy-feely’ (Shakman et al., 2007) approach that has been translated into one-day multicultural fairs and monthly assemblies commending virtuous acts. Canadian researchers Schick and St. Denis (2005: 308) argue that this approach perpetuates ‘a mythology of racelessness and stupefying innocence [based on the] construction of an egalitarian, not racist [Canadian] national self-image’.

Although we do not support the use of the social responsibility performance standards as articulated above, this discussion becomes significant to teacher education and new teacher experiences in BC as there appear to be many interpretations of social justice that weave in and out of programs and policies at the school, university and ministry levels. And even if social justice is understood as taking an active, critical stance toward dismantling inequities and improving life chances of children, Shakman et al. (2007) suggest that those preservice teachers participating in programs focused on social justice will eventually enter schools during practicums, or as certified teachers, and will bump up against varied and controversial discourses of social justice and social responsibility. In an attempt to fit in, or survive this immersion, they may abandon notions of social justice as activism in favor of adopting the soft approach celebrated by the status quo. Moreover, they may in fact, be relieved to abandon the perspectives on social justice presented in their teacher education programs. In both ways they are faced with choices about maintaining or shifting current educational discourses and actions regarding social justice.

New teacher induction and mentorship

Focusing on connections between teacher preparation programs and beginning practice, Wang et al. (2008) note that when beginning their careers, new teachers discover that pedagogy introduced in teacher preparation programs is not always consistent with or supported by their existing school cultures. Consequently, these researchers contend that new teachers often make adjustments in an attempt to fit in to school cultures and abandon their preservice understandings. Wang et al. suggest that unfortunately, adjusting pedagogy or philosophies does not necessarily translate into more effective teaching. Moreover, they observe that not all structured mentoring relationships necessarily support ‘reform-minded’ teaching practices, and that the quality of mentorship depends largely on the mentor’s own dispositions and practices. Furthermore, effects of mentoring programs are limited by how beginning teachers respond and the mentoring contexts in which relationships are situated. In response to this, Wang et al. (2008), along with Kardos and Johnson (2007), maintain that meaningful mentorship takes place in worksites where new teachers interact with experienced colleagues in a purposeful, ongoing reciprocal relationship. In these reciprocal communities of practice, veteran teachers provide new teachers with supported opportunities to improve their practice and new teachers are encouraged to contribute their unique talents and skills. As a result, these new teachers are inducted into a professional culture that advocates direct, positive, supportive growth and development.

Participants

Participants in this study were selected from a larger population of new teachers who graduated from a Western Canadian university teacher education program. The 27 participants were grouped by graduation year: Group 1 included six graduates completing their teacher education program December 2005; Group 2 included 10 graduates completing December 2006; and Group 3 included 11 graduates completing August 2007 and one graduate completing April 2008. Of the three groups, Group 3 participants were able to choose at the beginning of the program to participate in a small cohort focused on social justice. Group 1 and 2 participants did not have this option and were randomly chosen from among all applicants to the teacher education program to constitute a cohort focused on social justice during their year at the university.

The 27 participants in this study came from a variety of backgrounds, ethnicities and cultural experiences. Of the 23 female participants, all but five were Caucasian. These five women came from Korean, Chinese, Peruvian, South Asian and Egyptian cultural/ethnic backgrounds. Of the four male volunteers, all were Caucasian except for one who was of Chinese ancestry. Twenty-three of the participants were born in Canada. However, those born elsewhere (in England, China, Korea and Peru) were partially raised in Canada and attended schools in BC. At the time of the interviews, 19 of the participants were under the age of 30, six were between the ages 30 and 40 and two were between the ages 40 and 55. Twenty-six of the participants were raised in urban or suburban environments. Only one participant was from a rural, northern Canadian community. The majority of the participants were from middle-class backgrounds, although one participant discussed his early struggles with the social welfare system.

Since graduating, most of the participants were teaching in some capacity in a publicly funded or an independent school located in the Lower Mainland of BC, the more populated southwestern part of the province. However, one participant was working in college teaching basic adult education, one was teaching in rural British Columbia and two had worked in international school contexts. Of the 27 participants, 22 were working in BC public school settings, 18 had secured a teaching position (whether temporary, full-time or short-term) and seven participants remained employed as Teachers-On-Call (TOCs). Some working as TOCs moved into temporary term positions ranging in length from 9 weeks to 1 year. As well, to fill the needs of a particular school, many of the positions held by these new teachers were pieced together to create unique and challenging assignments.

Research approaches

Semi-structured interviews were conducted by Philpott and aimed at engaging participants in narratives about their past and present understandings of social justice (Gillham, 2000; LeCompte and Preissle, 1993). A semi-structured interview format using open-ended questions allowed participants to provide varied responses. ² They shared narratives about life experiences and elaborated on personal perspectives and concerns.

When possible, Philpott went to participants’ schools and sat with them in their classrooms after school hours to create a more authentic interview experience. Of the 26 participants interviewed, 15 were interviewed in their classroom settings. Philpott also invited them to discuss the practical aspects of social justice education in relation to physical artifacts such as student work samples or teacher-developed curriculum. Those who did share curriculum ideas and strategies, mostly showed a small selection of children’s literature related to social justice issues, which they used to stimulate student discussions and writing. In some cases, they shared entries in student response logs and posters students had created. Because few were able to offer examples of curriculum or activities they had developed, oral accounts of personal and teaching experiences as provided during participant interviews became the primary data source for this study.

In what follows, participant discourses related to feeling encouraged to incorporate social justice into their practice are presented first. Next, those discourses related to feeling discouraged about this issue are discussed and finally, we make recommendations for supporting new teachers as they grappled with social justice in the context of teaching.

Teaching from a social justice, or social responsibility stance

The analysis of interview data revealed that some the participants’ discourses approached more of a social justice stance as outlined by researchers (Adams, 2000; Cochran-Smith, 2004; D’Souza et al., 2007; Ladson-Billings, 1994). In keeping with this stance, participants, identified below by pseudonyms, often deviated from the prescribed curriculum to create relevant learning opportunities such as inviting students to engage in discussions about potentially controversial topics.

I’m a first year teacher and I talk about religions in my class. I’m just like ‘But this is my kids’ experiences. Am I to ignore their own experiences?’ If we should speak openly about race or speak openly about anything else, why can’t we speak openly about religion? This is multicultural Canada … And like in a school like this, I sit in some of my reading groups with an Aboriginal student, some Muslim students and some Punjabi students and Christian and so we are all sitting there and we can have some religious talks because we just talk about it openly. (Naila, 17 April 2008)

As well, to help stimulate discussions, many participants cited using children’s literature to ‘start conversations about social justice issues [and to] broaden the kids’ experiences’ (Jada, 10 June 2008). Researchers’ definition of teaching for social justice included a commitment to pedagogy that nurtured critical thinking and invited varied perspectives (D’Souza et al., 2007). By teaching students through debate and discussion about issues of social justice, participants such as Naila and Jada were offering their students opportunities to engage with such varied perspectives and worldviews that could potentially further shape their identities and discourses.

Other participants’ discourses suggested that some leaned toward more of a social responsibility stance, largely in keeping with the BC performance standards (Government of British Columbia, 2001). In taking this stance, participants created learning experiences related to themes such as: community building, ‘[I created] a ‘peace table’ where students work together to solve problems’ (Beth, 1 November 2007); anti-bullying, ‘We’ve done a little bit on bullying’ (Richard, 8 November 2007); self-esteem building and caring for each other, ‘From the minute I greet every child at the door until they leave, I feel like we are doing things to make children feel accepted, wanted and special’ (Liz, 8 May 2008).

In examining the participants’ discourses on their classroom experiences, it is apparent that they had found a variety of ways to infuse what they perceived as social justice into their curriculum and practice. It seems then that the types of activities or experiences the participants were able to create for their students largely depended on their perceptions and interpretations of social justice and social responsibility. However, while acknowledging researchers’ discrepant definitions of social justice and social responsibility, separating these terms into two distinct teaching stances was not always clear and obvious (Cochran-Smith, 2004; Government of British Columbia, 2001; Harro, 2000). Furthermore, the extent to which participants were able to create social justice experiences for their students was not only dependent on their perceptions of social justice but contingent on their personal commitment and interests as well as various external conditions and experiences specific to new teachers.

New teacher induction

Researchers argue that successful mentorship is based on building supportive communities where new and experienced teachers collaborate to develop engaging and innovative practices (Kardos and Johnson, 2007; Wang et al., 2008; Wenger, 1998). However, Wang et al., note that new teachers often left university programs only to find that the ideas and pedagogy introduced in their teacher education program were not supported in their schools. As a result, many participants indicated that unless, once out teaching, they were ‘still engaged’ (Adelle, 3 April 2008) in discussions and professional development around social justice, it would ‘go by the wayside’ (Adelle, 3 April 2008) and thus be difficult to maintain the social justice approach they had become familiar with in university.

Conversely, those participants who felt strongly about social justice education stated that it was ultimately up to the individual teacher to take responsibility for his/her own professional growth and development. As Raine noted, ‘I think it is a matter of taking your learning into your own hands; the options are there for people who want to take them’ (10 August 2007). For this reason it could be construed that those teachers who abandon perspectives they adopted during their preservice experience blamed it on lack of quality mentorship and professional development opportunities. An alternative interpretation is that they may have been using this simply as an excuse for not infusing social justice into their practice. In other words, these inconsistencies could indicate that some participants were enacting a ‘cover story’ (Clandinin and Connelly, 1995) because they face too many challenges as new teachers in their school contexts that it becomes too complicated for them to attempt to address social justice in their practice.

New teacher mentorship

Researchers cautioned that, although important, the effectiveness of structured mentorship programs is contingent on how such programs are perceived and implemented by various stakeholders (Wang et al., 2008). The following, and at times contradictory, participant discourses on mentorship programs highlight the complexities articulated by educational researchers.

Although many new classroom teachers, such as Jian, discussed the importance of mentorship, they often were unaware of whether or not such programs existed in their school districts, ‘To tell you the truth, I don’t know. If there is one, I was never told about it nor offered it’ (24 April 2008). Moreover, if they did have access to such programs, new teachers often chose not to participate for various reasons. For example, Beth, with a busy schedule as a mother and new teacher, found that ‘trying to get everything up and running and then adding another step [attending mentorship meetings] … could be burdensome’ (1 November 2008). Or, others such as Kiran (a TOC), Sandra and Jenna (working in longer-term positions), discovered that district mentorship programs were not available to new teachers who were not full-time classroom or specialist teachers.

In reality, most often participants in this study found it more beneficial to seek out their own mentors. As suggested by Jada, ‘I have a good network of people at my school who have the same philosophy … I found my own mentors’ (10 June 2008). Naila also noted that networking with like-minded educators through professional development could lead to informal mentorship relationships.

You know what ends up happening sometimes though, which is a little bit frustrating, is that it is the teachers who already have that [social justice] frame of mind that will seek out that networking. So like for me there is a Pro D [professional development day] coming up and one of them is on Kenya and I’m going to go to that. (Naila, 17 April 2008)

Wang et al. (2008) and Wenger (1998) suggested that informally connecting and collaborating with other professionals holding similar perspectives and practices could very well be a more enriching and positive experience. However, Wang et al. also expressed a note of caution about connecting with ‘like-minded’ people that may not support reform-minded teaching practices. Naila’s frustration that not all teachers seek out transformative experiences highlights that mentorship relationships might simply perpetuate ‘like-minded’ practices that are far from transformative for both the teachers and students.

Glaringly absent from all the participants’ discourses on support, were references to well-developed, structured, district initiated, school focused, collaborative mentorship relationships that are recommended by researchers (Kardos and Johnson, 2007; Wang et al., 2008). Moreover, even though participants suggested that mentorship was important, most made a conscious choice not to investigate programs offered in their school districts. This might suggest that mentorship programs as they are currently offered in school districts in BC are not meeting the diverse needs of new teachers. Furthermore, those mentorship programs are not providing adequate, if any, opportunities to critically engage new teachers in professional dialogue regarding a wide variety of educational issues including social justice education (Philpott, 2010). It also speaks to Clandinin and Connelly’s (1995) concerns that new teachers often are isolated and have few places where they feel safe enough to share their challenges. Perhaps by consciously choosing to not investigate or participate in mentorship programs, these new teachers were attempting to hide their feelings of uncertainty from their colleagues. Others such as Naila or Jada, who were confident, willing to take risks and committed to teaching from a social justice perspective actively sought out experiences on their own to further develop their understanding and practice of social justice education.

New teacher experiences and job-related realities

According to researchers, how well new teachers adapt to ever-evolving changes and the dissonance this can invoke, often determines whether they remain in the profession (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Haberman, 2005; Mills, 2007). Moreover, the ability to adapt to the complexities, changes and expectations inherent in the teaching profession is largely dependent on how adeptly new teachers improvise and play out their various roles and navigate outside pressures from governments, schools, parents and society (Clandinin and Connelly, 1995). Furthermore, researchers argue that many new teachers feel obligated to follow the authoritative ideas funneled into the profession and compliance is equated with ensuring greater acceptance and a sense of belonging within their respective school communities (Clandinin and Connelly, 1995; Wenger, 1998).

Many of the participants overwhelmingly agreed that the most significant factors encouraging new teachers’ abilities to incorporate social justice into their practice were support, professional respect, and the freedom to explore new ways of teaching. For many, working with a supportive, encouraging staff, or at least one staff member and/or administrator was instrumental in their continued development as social justice educators.

Whatever’s best for kids and gets kids thinking and opens up opportunities for learning, she’s [the administrator] all for it. (Ryan, 22 May 2007)

As Ryan indicated, in these communities of practice, the veteran teachers and/or administrators valued the insights of new teachers and conversely, the new teachers acknowledged the wisdom and experience of the veteran teachers and/or administrators. Although members of these particular communities of practice may not necessarily share common ideals, the veteran teachers appeared to be willing to make space for new teachers’ discourses and practices to emerge. In this same vein, new teachers suggested that supportive and encouraging relationships were beneficial in creating an atmosphere conducive to taking risks.

However, this was not the case for all the participants in this study. While staff and administrative support was forthcoming for some, a number of these new teachers suggested that feeling scrutinized – for example, ‘you feel that you are being evaluated every day’ (Jian, 24 April 2008), or under ‘pressure’ (Sun, 6 December 2007) to perform hindered their abilities to explore social justice in their practice. As Wenger (1998) indicates, in communities of practice feelings or perceptions of incompetence could potentially leave new members fearful of taking risks. The following discourses highlight the overwhelming need for acceptance as a ‘newcomer’ in a community of practice.

Many participants noted that they were uncertain about bringing social justice into their practice because doing so might affect future employment possibilities. Feelings of incompetence, whether grounded or not, surfaced in their discourses.

I feel like I don’t know anything. I just – It’s not to say I feel unprepared or anything but it is just it’s a constant learning curve. You are afraid to mess up, you know. Your future jobs are riding on the impressions you make and it’s just kind of like there is a certain drive to play it safe. (Jill, 2 February 2008)

As well, these participants indicated that, as new teachers, they often abandoned their own beliefs and steered away from contributing to controversial conversations in favor of silence and maintaining the status quo. Cognizant of their precarious status as novices within the staff, they often chose to establish an identity of compliance as a way of further securing a sense of inclusion within the community of practice. These fears of being marginalized were clearly stated by Richard (a classroom teacher):

I keep my mouth shut here. I hear a lot I don’t agree with … It is difficult to come to a teacher who’s got tenure or been here for that long and say like ‘That was kind of an offensive or insensitive thing to say.’ They are going to come back to you ‘Well who are you?’ You’ve got to test the waters first too, yeah. Tread lightly, yeah. Yeah. And you can’t burn your bridges and you gotta choose your battles too. (8 November 2008)

A strong desire to be accepted and included extended beyond the staff to encompass the wider community, including students and parents. Fears of offending parents or influencing the beliefs of their students by engaging them in activities or discussions about social justice were evident in the discourses of many of the participants.

One book, I was really reluctant to bring it in, it was about different kids of families … same sex parents. I sometimes fear that the children are going to go to their parents and say my teacher is teaching about same sex families. I went to a workshop at the district and they said they would back anyone who taught about same sex marriage. (Lian, 16 June 2008)

Applying Clandinin’s and Connelly’s (1995) and Wenger’s (1998) notions of belonging within a community, it became apparent that for these new teachers establishing themselves as respected and accepted members within a variety of communities (for example, school staff, parent, classroom) was most critical in determining how, or what, they taught at this point in their careers. Without a collaborative and supportive community, innovative and transformative practice informed by a social justice perspective was not likely to occur. This discourse of discouragement was in stark contrast to the discourse of encouragement presented previously, where participants spoke about how they felt more able to take risks and implement innovative practices as valued members in the context of a supportive professional community that included colleagues, parents and administrators.

Although acceptance figured prominently in the discourses of these participants, curriculum and job assignment constraints were also viewed as factors discouraging many from exploring social justice in their practice. While almost all of the participants were searching for full-time work, many had minimal control over the type of job they were granted, let alone any input into which grade, subject or school to practice. In fact, some eventually chose to work overseas or in private school settings in order to obtain full-time employment as classroom teachers. These discussions about employment complexities support the argument advanced by Clandinin and Connelly’s (1995) that teachers do not work in isolation, nor do they work in settings solely of their own choosing. Working in a variety of grades and schools, participants such as Ciana, who were employed as TOCs, found it most challenging to implement practices related to social justice.

It’s kind of tough because you’re only there for a day, but in the classes I’ve been in for more than a day, you get a lot of, ‘That’s not how we do it!’ and I try to explain to them that I’m going to be there for a while and to try my way out. It’s really hard because you are like a guest. I TOCed for a while and you just try to go in there and make the day run as smoothly as possible. You might not be able to teach the way that you really want. (Ciana, 26 January 2008)

Working part-time in job-share situations was often common for new teachers. For those participants, sharing a classroom with another teacher often meant that they felt as though they had less freedom to explore their own ideas. Comments such as, ‘I’ve been working off of the other teacher’s yearly plans’ (Halle, 26 November 2007), ‘it is still her class’ (Liz, 8 May 2008), and ‘I feel like a guest’ (Sandra, 15 November 2007) indicated that these teachers felt constrained by their teaching situation. This feeling of being constrained, or obligated to comply with the pedagogy or plans of other teachers was echoed by Jada (a learning support teacher) and Meg (a music teacher). As specialist teachers, these participants found implementing their own ideas challenging because they either had ‘little short chunks of time’ (Meg, 19 November 2007), or ‘because I am a non-enrolling teacher. [Enrolling teachers] set the program and I support it’ (Jada, 10 June 2008).

Clearly, these excerpts speak to the challenges faced by new teachers working with diverse student populations in a variety of school settings. For those participants working in part-time or casual situations, securing a sense of belonging and membership in a school community becomes less than likely and it appears to further heighten their experience of isolation and marginalization rather than foster their feelings of inclusion and opportunities for collaboration.

However, regardless of teaching assignment, many of the participants found curriculum constraints to be one of the most limiting areas in terms of infusing social justice into their practice. For many participants, meeting the demands of the Ministry of Education mandated curriculum posed challenges when trying to incorporate new ideas about social justice.

Well I just have Grade 12 Geography. [The students] are wanting to know their marks all the time, very conscientious of scholarship. It’s hard for them. That ends up being the most pressure transferred to me basically. (Mared, 7 February 2008)

This illustrates the point made by Clandinin and Connelly (1995) about information provided in documents such as pre-published curriculum materials that carry the weight of authority, which is funneled into professional knowledge landscapes (for example, schools), by the ‘conduit’ (for example, government ministries, district policies). The material that is found in schools, they argued, carries a certain value-laden, moral orientation that leaves little room for divergent or critical pedagogy. Participants in this study recounted how they felt overwhelmed by curriculum demands and felt constrained in their teaching practices. According to them, the barrage of information they received, coupled with challenging, diverse classroom settings and little control of teaching assignments, kept them from exploring and engaging students in initiatives such as social justice. However, while acknowledging the challenges and constraints facing these new teachers, it could also be argued that many of them found a multitude of reasons to justify why they were unable to incorporate social justice into their teaching practice, although it is not entirely clear why they chose to do so. We offer some explanations for this in our discussion below.