Spirituality, Education & Society: An Integrated Approach

14,402 mm
Spirituality, Education & Society

Spirituality, Education

An Integrated Approach
Njoki N. Wane
University of Toronto
& Society
Energy L. Manyimo
and
Eric J. Ritskes (Eds.) Njoki N. Wane, Energy L. Manyimo

and Eric J. Ritskes (Eds.)
Foreword by Ali A. Abdi
Spirituality, education and society: An integrated approach argues the value of spirituality
in education as a way to address the lived experiences and personal knowledge of students, Foreword by Ali A. Abdi
with the goal of creating a more holistic, transformative educational process. This edited
volume has a wide array of viewpoints which all point to the importance of spirituality in the
authors’ personal lives, their communities and society at large. Spirituality is conceptualised
as a base from which to challenge dominant forms of knowing, while in the process being
able to center and engage with an important aspect of the student that has been missing
from current evaluations – their spiritual selves.Within the diversity of this volume it becomes
evident that spirituality cannot be confined to a singular definition and that educators must
be willing to create spaces to foster spiritual growth and exploration if we are to break away
from the commoditized, disempowering system that is so dominant today.
This edited collection is a valuable resource for students, practitioners, educators and admin-
istrators who wish to engage in transformational schooling. Its multidisciplinary approach
engages ideas around critical pedagogy, sociology of education, and inclusive schooling.
There is an increasing need for exploring novel paradigms of studying education in the con-
text of the dynamics that straddle social, economic and technological processes that have
come to characterize the world in recent years. This book is a timely contribution in this
respect as its focus transcends hitherto applied approaches that depend largely on western and Eric J. Ritskes (Eds.)
orientation. The book breaks new grounds in studying education and society that find sig- Njoki N. Wane, Energy L. Manyimo
nificant relevance in societies that are marginalized by the dominant western understanding.
The authors draw from the rich heritage of spirituality that is akin to the non-western social
paradigms to develop a rigorous but creative concept of schooling. I am sure practitioners,
researchers and students of education will find it a valuable source of practical and theoretical
information that would widen their horizon of understanding of sociology of education. - Tom
Mongare Ndege, PhD, Moi University, Kenya
The editors have compiled a brilliant collection of essays. Each

piece of scholarly work shows how spirituality is a paramount
part of our everyday lives and is connected to teaching, learning, ISBN 978-94-6091-601-4
living and healing. This is a timely and most relevant work that
is sure to spur critical dialogue and discussion. This collection
shows that while the spirit may be wounded it can never be bro-
ken. - Erica Neeganagwedgin, PhD, University of Toronto SensePublishers
S e n s e P u b l i s h e r s DIVS
B_SENSE006_48 DIVS Wane_PB.indd 1 30-05-11 12:26:07

SPIRITUALITY, EDUCATION & SOCIETY
Foreword by Ali A. Abdi
Edited by
Njoki N. Wane
Energy L. Manyimo
and
Eric J. Ritskes
SENSE PUBLISHERS
ROTTERDAM / BOSTON / TAIPEI
A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.
ISBN 978-94-6091-601-4 (paperback)

ISBN 978-94-6091-602-1 (hardback)
ISBN 978-94-6091-603-8 (e-book)
Published by: Sense Publishers,

P.O. Box 21858, 3001 AW Rotterdam, The Netherlands
www.sensepublishers.com
Printed on acid-free paper
All rights reserved © 2011 Sense Publishers
No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or
by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without
written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the
purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of
the work.
DEDICATION
This project is dedicated to the seekers; to those who are willing to move beyond
the dictated realms of quantifiable knowledge and search for meaning outside of
what can be physically experienced. May you find what you are looking for.
It is also dedicated to those who have gone before us – the faithful that have
blazed the path and passed down their knowledge for us to follow in their
footsteps. Without you, we would not be here.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgement .................................................................................................. ix
Foreword
Ali A. Abdi ............................................................................................................... xi
Introduction
Njoki N. Wane & Eric Ritskes ............................................................................... xv
Chapter 1: Situating Children in the Discourse of Spirituality

Susannah Cole ......................................................................................................... 1
Chapter 2: Connected: Indigenous Spirituality as Resistance in the Classroom

Eric J. Ritskes ......................................................................................................... 15
Chapter 3: Nourishing the Authentic Self: Teaching with Heart and Soul
Lisa Hart ................................................................................................................ 37
Chapter 4: Spirituality and Its Relevance for the Contemplative Educator

Jennifer Motha ....................................................................................................... 49
Chapter 5: Spirituality: A Philosophy and a Research Tool

Njoki N. Wane ........................................................................................................ 67
Chapter 6: The Role of Spirituality in Maori and Tibetan Village Schools

Jia Luo ................................................................................................................... 83
Chapter 7: Spirituality and Indigenous Knowledges: Study of Kototama and

Decolonization in the School System
Yumiko Kawano ..................................................................................................... 97
Chapter 8: The Dialectics of Western Christianity and African Spirituality

Akena Adyanga .................................................................................................... 111
Chapter 9: A Spiritual Journey in the Academy: My Personal Experience

Energy L. Manyimo .............................................................................................. 127
Chapter 10: My Name is ‘Mohamed’, But Please Call Me ‘John’: Canadian

Racism, Spirit Injury and the Renaming of the Indigenous Body
as a Right of Passage
Aman Sium .......................................................................................................... 139
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 11: Holding Relationships as Sacred Responsibilities: A Journey of

Spiritual Growth and Being
Nadia Salter ........................................................................................................ 157
Chapter 12: Spirituality: An Interconnected Path to Healing

Adelin Brunal ....................................................................................................... 169
Chapter 13: Spirit Injury: The Impact of Colonialism on African Spirituality

Jennifer M. Jagire ................................................................................................ 183
Chapter 14: The Loss of My Indigenous Languages: As I Lose, I Struggle to

Find
Wariri Muhungi.................................................................................................... 193
Chapter 15: Religious Fundamentalism, Political Power and the Colonization

of Spirituality
Emily Antze .......................................................................................................... 205
Chapter 16: Wisdom Sharing and Altered Consciousness: A Transformative

Learning Project
Jennifer Richmond-Bravo .................................................................................... 219
Conclusion: Extending the Dialogue

Energy L. Manyimo & Eric J. Ritskes .................................................................. 235
Notes on the Contributors .................................................................................... 239
Subject Index........................................................................................................ 243
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The editors would like to thank the contributors to this volume for the way in
which they have opened their spirits and shared their stories; without you, this
book would not exist. There is something intimate about spirituality and the stories
that are shared here; we appreciate the courage it takes to reveal your soul in such a
public way. In receiving your stories, hopefully we have revealed and presented
them in ways that honour both the intimacy as well as the power that is inherent
within the stories and the act of telling them.
Not only is this book indebted to the people who have directly contributed
chapters but, much like in any project, there is a vast web of people who have
contributed in less direct, but no less important, ways. Much gratitude is given to
the people who have spoken spiritual words to us, both within the walls of the
academy and beyond them. To those who have spoken and acted into our lives, our
family, colleagues, friends and mentors, this book is a testament to how no one can
live, work or study in a vacuum – we are all connected in spiritual and physical
ways.
To all of you: Asante sana.
ix
FOREWORD
In Spirituality, Education & Society: An Integrated Approach, Njoki Wane, Energy

Manyimo and Eric Ritskes have given us an important scholarly gift, that has been
seemingly missed by so many of us in the burgeoning educational literature. The
location of spirituality in education has been definitely, not only under researched,
it has been also severely misunderstood. Indeed, when we see spirituality for what
it is: an appreciation of the expansive immaterial reality that influences social
relations, mental dispositions as well as the universally more inclusive explanations
we attach to the metaphysical world, then we should have, long ago, incorporated
this important area of educational studies into our realms of research, teaching and
scholarly conclusions. Interestingly, the world of academia seems to have shied
away from confronting, indeed, advancing the constructively complex terrain of
spirituality. Perhaps most of us believed that we were ill-equipped to investigate a
topic that is not as measurable, or minimally as observable as the conventional
educational topics and/or educational phenomena we examine in our classrooms,
research projects and academic conferences. Undoubtedly, that could partially
explain the apparent immense shortcomings in this extremely important area of
study. But there may even be a bigger reason for this intellectual vacuity. Via an
expansive misunderstanding of what the conceptual and para-practical
constructions of spirituality contain, many academics might construe such study
and its meta-operational dimensions as attached to, or at least related to organized
religions and, therefore, should only concern those who engage in such practices.
While one need not formally attempt to separate spirituality from religions,
mainly because religious people would have every right to also be spiritually
connected, it is the case as it is presented in this pioneering book, that spirituality is
more expansive than the general domains of many religions, appeals to more
inclusive aspects of people’s lives, which are not, by the way, limited to linearly
identifiable situations and topics, but in almost every space, context, relationships,
intentions, and assumptions. As such, the limiting or the uni-dimensional
understanding of spirituality deprives educational contexts and related spaces of
schooling, as the editors and their contributors so cogently note, the richness of
both learners and teachers relating to their world with holistic dispositions that
have the volition to understand and appreciate so much that is not immediately
observable, but that definitely influences, even occasionally determines, the way
we relate to everything that informs our contexts including the living, the physical,
the hidden, and the overall amazing wonders of the universe.
Such understanding and appreciation could assure a more harmonious existence,
not only in general relational prospects, but more so, in the totality of one’s own
being. And wouldn’t that be something that will positively impact the lives of
many learners who feel socially alienated, academically detached, even mistakenly
labeled for seeking out and surviving (as much as humanly possible) in de-
xi
FOREWORD
centering learning contours that neither enfranchise their inner existentialities, and
of course, never support their yearning for less measurable understanding of their
subjective locations, needs and aspirations. Needless to add that the education
system, as it is structured today in Canada and elsewhere, with its basically
colonialist and supposedly rationalist intentions and constructions, never aimed for
a spiritually amicable learning and teaching processes that enrich more than the
market needs of the schooling project. Indeed, it is these historically-located
rationalist assumptions, operations and expected outcomes that would generally
stifle the clearly needed spiritualizations of the pedagogical context. But to what
extent is education really rationalist, objective and effectively measurable? Perhaps
a more important question: whose rationalist, de-spiritualizing life systems are
being advanced in current relations of the schooling project? If these enlightenment
and by extension, modernist-driven ways of learning and teaching are
representative of one way of seeing the world, then the epistemic enfranchisement
of spirituality in educational research and schooling platforms should and will
delightfully disturb such hegemonic edifice of monocultural scientism which has
dominated the learning landscape for too long.
Undoubtedly, as should be clear from the many, diverse themes contained in this
book, the absence of spirituality in education represents more than a purely
rationalist prospect. More so, it is one hitherto functional and dangerous scheme to
diminish the knowledge foundations as well as the epistemological revival of
Indigenous and communal ways of knowing and social well-being. As implicated
in the pages of this exceptionally timely book, therefore, it should not be
uncommon to realize that in today’s less organic societies in Indigenous America
(North and South) and Oceania, Africa and Asia along with the huge diasporic
communities from especially the latter two, which now resides in North America
and Europe, and whose educational well-being has not been fully supported by the
conventional structures of schooling, the introduction of the spiritual could play an
important role in recasting the educational system as less alienating, more
subjectively connected, and capable of seeing beyond the economistic and biased
exam-driven walls of all learning and teaching. Needless to add that, beyond these
learners, people in all corners of the world, regardless of their social or ethnic
background, will definitely benefit from a spiritually enriching educational
experience.
In critically responding to these learning and human emancipation related
attachments of spirituality, this book powerfully achieves, via its five sections and
16 chapters, which range from analyzing the conceptual foundations/constructions
of the case, examining the methodological selves of the ‘story’, and critically
deformalizing its practices, a potentially multi-centering analytical perspective in,
not only convincingly advancing the indispensability of spirituality for our actual
educational existences, but as well, in discursively illuminating the expansiveness
of the meanings as well as the practices (yes, practices) of spiritually as directly
affecting, and in original, lived terms, impacting the ways we create meanings,
establish knowledge systems, behave or do not behave in our cultural contexts, and
make use of the resources that are available and that we use to understand,
xii
FOREWORD
appreciate, even recreate in our lived milieus. As the authors in this important
endeavor clearly expound, the noticeable absence of spirituality from the
educational research and from contemporary spaces of schooling, is to say the least
lamentable, and the coming of this work and other treatises that should follow it,
are essentially needed, and should awaken, one must hope, in all those whose
perception of public education as a primary public good is authentic and present,
an urgent sense of advancing the place of spirituality in all learning situations,
relationships and outcomes.
Ali A. Abdi,
University of Alberta
xiii
NJOKI N. WANE & ERIC J. RITSKES
INTRODUCTION
For too long spirituality has been an underexplored, often misunderstood aspect in
the field of education. This book is an attempt to show that exploring spirituality
within the context of education will create new pathways of understanding, for
educators and students. By weaving spirituality into learning and knowledge
creation discourses, educators as well as learners can foster spiritual growth while
strengthening the connections between the learner, knowledge and the process of
schooling. The main intention of writing this book is to create an educational space
that develops learners’ and educators’ spiritual interconnectedness in relation to
learning, schooling and the community at large. Spirituality is very important to
many people’s lives and valuing the spirituality of students and teachers means
valuing the uniqueness of individuals, regardless of race, gender, creed, sexuality
or ability. Spirituality has been silenced and marginalized as a discourse or
embodied knowledge in the academy. In this book we explore the questions and
issues of spirituality and its intersections with schooling from a wide range of
diverse perspectives. Often, the education systems like to believe that they are
eminently concerned with the real problems and dilemmas facing society, culture,
human suffering, and the struggle for liberation. In the business of this never-
ending search for liberation, there is no time for what people consider as spiritual,
which is considered to be “otherworldliness and esotericism” and of little value. In
this book, we argue that the spiritual quest is inherently part and parcel of
liberation and resistance as well as a vital part of society and the search for holistic
living and learning; it is a search for guiding visions and values within this world
and for the many people who occupy this planet. What academics perceive to be a
flight from the ‘real’ is often a quest for the heart of the real (Tacey, 2002).
Spirituality is about personal empowerment, personal and collective
transformation, and relationships.
For instance, many of us do not think about breath, yet if we were to stop and to
imagine that there would be no human or any living being without air, it would
lead us to recognize and pay attention to that certain aspect of who we are as
something that is collective and common to all of us – Breath. Thich Nhat Hanh,
says in western culture we are always focused on the future and not on just
“being”. We are always working towards something, always blinded by the next
step so that we forget many of the inner journeys we are taking. We are so goal
oriented, that we forget the little changes we make. We have such high ideals of
what change means that we do not pay attention to the very breath that we need
xv
and that our next door neighbour needs to sustain us to make these anticipated huge
changes. As a result, we direct our energy to those places that may not be attainable
at the moment, forgetting the many inner changes that need to take place in order
to create the spaces that are conducive to real spiritual change. What we are
advocating in this book is that we need a different level of consciousness, a new
way of seeing the world around us: A focus on the self and our spiritual selves as
intricately connected and vital to the environments, goals, locations, changes and
desires that we seek to attain.
Many times, when we bring spirituality in our academic discussion, it is closely
followed by discomfort and there is an instant disconnect that is created; the
inevitable critiques of the rigor of your academic engagement or your level of
theorizing, that you are advocating soft discourses that should be left to those who
are not of the academic world, spirituality as only for those who peep from a
distance at academic walls. Academics who lay any claim to spiritual knowledge or
experience are asked to leave it at the doors of the academy upon entry and politely
(or perhaps not so politely) asked to pick it up as they leave, almost as if there is a
fear that spirituality will somehow ‘taint’ the academic spaces. Spirituality in the
academy is like mixing water and oil – there is inevitable and strict separation – but
this should not be. We cannot divorce the intellect from our invisible being – that
is, who we really are bell hooks, writing on spirituality in education, said: “We
can’t begin to talk about spirituality in education until we talk about what it means
to have a life in the spirit …. To live a life in the spirit, to be true to a life of the
spirit, we have to be willing to be called on – often in ways that we may not like”
(2003, p. 158). What this means is that, for educators who genuinely invoke the
spirit and strive to connect with others at deeper levels that appeal to the emotional
consciousness, to the heart, there is no place in the academy for them. As
educators, we have to address both needs for intellectual as well as emotional
growth. The structures that surround us have many tactics and methods of
suppressing the spirit and creating oppression, depression and many times spirit
injury. As academics, activists and educators we must be willing to recognize the
damage that our current systems are inflicting on us, society and students and
choose to bring the spirit into our work in ways that challenge existing structures
and that create spaces for the ‘whole self’, spaces that embrace spiritual and
emotional knowledges.
The study of spirituality is also a call to the integration of hope, love and unity
into our research, our lives and our classrooms. It is about creating organic spaces
of trust and respect. Even the utterance of such words as hope and love in academic
spaces brings awkwardness and disjointedness – these words don’t seem to belong
in such a place that values abstractness, cold truth and numbers. Bringing
spirituality back into the academy is not a rejection of logic or reason but a
rejection of the privileged position that it is given; it is a call for the inclusion of
hope, love, respect, diversity, peace, community and humour – the things that make
us whole. For too long the academy has rejected these aspects to its detriment, this
xvi
INTRODUCTION
book then is also a call for the rejuvenation of the academy, the introduction of a
vitality and holism that has been largely absent.
The arguments presented in this book are that, if we do not pay attention, if we
separate the spirit from the self, if we allow the self to be disconnected by the
current education system – how can we expect things to change? The explicit goal
of this work is transformation. We cannot afford to be oblivious to the oppressive
structures that are continuously reproducing themselves in society and,
consequently, in education. We need to bring this level of consciousness to our
work in order to bring transformation. Some readers may not see the relevance of
what we are talking about and the subject at hand. The academic structure
functions to appeal to meritocracy and any deviation from the norm is challenged,
devalued and even ridiculed. What is not obvious to many scholars is the fact that
the academic discourse deals with abstract knowledge that appeals to the cognitive
faculties of the brain. Where it places value is on logic, reason and mental
abstractions. There is no emphasis or recognition that, in order to function as a
normal human being, you need to develop all aspects of yourself – that is the
invisible you – which some people refer to as spiritual self. In most academic
institutions, this is not encouraged and it becomes very difficult to talk of
spirituality in the academy. bell hooks argues:
Most of my teaching experience has been in climates that are totally, utterly,
and completely hostile to spirituality. Where colleagues laugh at you if they
think that you have some notion of spiritual life. … my teaching practice has
been…within an environment that is utterly hostile … Not naming that
hostility but working with it in such a way that the spirit can be present in the
midst of it: that the fire burns bright without any generation, anything in the
environment generating it. (2003, p. 162)
bell hooks concludes her argument on spirituality in education by stating: “I can

testify to the meaningfulness of spiritual practice and that such a practice sustains
and nurtures progressive teaching, progressive politics, and enhances the struggle
of liberation” (2003, p. 164).
There is an urgent need for educators who are willing to unsettle the status quo
and critically demand that mainstream discourses stop ignoring such essential
aspects of student’s growth. Many times, the message given is that learning is
solely an intellectual exercise, which negates the reality that the whole person
enters the classroom and that we, as educators who seek to nurture and grow, need
to appeal to all of their senses and faculties. As a result of this negation, students
are often unprepared to cope with topics of spirituality when they are raised in the
academy or are unable to connect and grow in atmospheres that feel sterile,
fragmented and devoid of aspects of themselves that they value.
In the course of writing and getting the material ready for this anthology, we
found that the difficulty of talking about spirituality in general paled in comparison
to when we pushed the envelope and asked how we might incorporate spirituality
in our learning, teaching, and everyday interaction in the academy. Also, it is
xvii
essential that we critically examine the impact of Eurocentric education and the
spiritual scars which emerge as a result of the indoctrination of learners into a
Western system of thought, as this is primarily what is valued in academia. If we
are to proceed in an ethical manner, we must interrogate the implications of an
educational system which reifies Eurocentric systems of thought, and a particular
method of generating knowledge. The insidiousness of privilege must be
acknowledged and challenging this must be thought of as part of the task of
introducing spirituality and holistic learning into the academy. Part of the privilege
of the dominant is that such ongoing connections between Eurocentric learning,
privilege, and the absence of spirituality are not remarked upon. Perpetuating
dominant frameworks on already suppressed indigenous spiritual beliefs is harmful
not only to the students but other educators (Potter, 1995, p. 73). As alternative
epistemological frameworks are widely rejected within academia, the outcome for
many students, especially those who come from a background where spiritual
knowledges are valued, is disengagement from one’s spiritual ways of
understanding and knowing the world. This results in epistemological dissonance.
Creative dissociation is a skill developed by many students to allow them to
survive the academic experience. It is these issues that we are evoking in this
anthology. Incorporating a spiritual paradigm would challenge us to recognize that
we are all connected in diverse ways and at varying levels of being and would
promote the re-valuing of diverse ways of knowing. There must be the recognition
that there are very real consequences to how we operate in the academy and in
society at large; in this way, we are held ethically and morally accountable for the
implications of our theorizing.
How then, do we incorporate and integrate the spiritual in the academy?
Spirituality has always been about inclusiveness; hence our practice needs to center
this. We do not want to perpetuate a hierarchy of values. Elsewhere Wane (2007,
2009) has indicated that there is no need to name our spirituality, however, we
should allow the space for it and provide space for students to define their
spirituality from their roots or religious backgrounds because the definition of
spirituality has to be open ended. What we are advocating is to have spirituality
included in the discussion, for the inclusion of voices and knowledges that have
been silenced. Some people may see this as moral or therapy work, but this is not
what we are pushing to have in the academy. It is allowing people to be authentic
to who they are and to their experiences. In this book then we are engaging with
questions such as: What is spirituality? What are the spiritual ways of knowing?
How do you situate yourself in the discourse of spirituality? What is your entry
point? What do you mean if you refer yourself as spiritual person? What factors
contribute to how you define your spirituality? How do you nurture the spiritual
self? What does spirituality entail? Why do we need to break the silence about
spirituality in education? How does being spiritually inclined help us in our work,
our research, our writing, our teaching? What would be the end result if everything
we did had a spiritual component in itself? What is the connection between
spirituality and learning; knowledge production; health; work; social justice;
culture; research; higher education? What do we mean when we talk of spiritual
xviii
INTRODUCTION
tools or spirituality as a discourse or a methodology? Our suggestion is that one

should define their spirituality by weaving together their understanding of what is
spiritual from their own background, the readings, everyday interactions and
experiences and discussion. That is, the definition that speaks to you is the correct
definition of spirituality. This is not a call to some sort of vague relativism but an
acceptance and valuing of personal experience and diversity as they fit into the
wider scope of knowledge and society.
Spirituality has been part and parcel of indigenous peoples of the world and
religious institutions and is an important part of life. Among indigenous peoples,
spirituality was never separated from everyday living. Today, we have fragmented
spirituality. When we examine spirituality in higher education, it is mainly in
relation to how knowledge is constructed. In relation to an emerging new age
spirituality, there has been great concerns because of appropriation and
commodification of past traditions and knowledges; however, the response from
New Age followers is that there has been a decline of traditional religion and this
new form of spirituality, fills that vacuum. There is this notion that the world’s
various spiritual traditions are public property and no longer the private preserve of
the parochial groups. Unfortunately, what happens is that the sacred becomes
commodified and in the process loses its sacredness. The messy conglomerate of
New Age mysticism moves away from the relational, connected and practical
spirituality that this book is advocating as a form of resistance to Eurocentric,
dominant discourses; instead, it all too easily falls prey to them. The diversity that
is advocated in this book is one that is willing to critically interrogate issues of
history, oppression, domination and the personal implications and relationships to
these forces.
How do we develop a contemplative mind that explores issues of social
injustice, discrimination, homophobia etc. within the contexts of history and
oppression? Inviting the contemplative does not mean being silent and passive; it is
the invoking of the humaneness in us that demands an action component to our
work. If we know the systems, the structures, the organizations that we operate in
that keep our spirit broken, create scars, fragment our humaneness, we need to
think of different ways of doing things. This transformation becomes possible
when we look inward, ponder deeply, and witness the contents of our
consciousness. This approach will help us to cultivate an inner and outer way of
learning, a pedagogy without imposition of religious doctrines. Spirituality is
therefore about awareness and honouring of wholeness and the interconnectedness
of all things through the mystery of what many refer to as life-force; higher power;
higher self; cosmic energy. This book seeks to explore these connections between
spirituality, society and schooling in new ways that illuminate how a holistic
education cannot be confined to a classroom or to a curriculum; a critical education
must engage with spirituality as seen in the whole self, society and learning as a
never ending process.
Part one of this book focuses on two aspects of spirituality as a concept. In
Chapter 1, “Situating children in the spirituality discourse”, Susannah Cole
explores how Western society and traditional development theory has failed to
xix
socialize children’s spiritual identity, choosing to value quantifiable elements of

development at the expense of multidimensional, interconnected and spiritual
aspects of childhood development. She uses her experience as an Early Childhood
Educator to explore how transformational learning can be brought about through
the inclusion of the whole child, through the inclusion of the spiritual alongside the
cognitive, physical, social and emotional development. This inclusion would allow
for each child to be centred in a nurturing environment that values their
differences.
In Chapter 2, “Connected: Indigenous spirituality in the classroom”, Eric
Ritskes explores how Eurocentric understandings of spirituality have negatively
centered the individual at the expense of the community and relationships. He
argues that spirituality, as conceived through indigenous knowledges, demands the
valuing of the relational as primary. This involves acknowledging connections to
the whole self, the community, history and to a higher power or larger framework.
It is through this recognition of the inter-connectedness of all things that inclusive,
transformational education can be implemented through recognizing and affirming
difference, collaborative learning, openness, and active/embodied learning.
Part two of this book looks at how spirituality can be conceived of as
methodology within the academy. In Chapter 3, “Teaching with heart and soul:
Nourishing the authentic self”, Lisa Hart explores why it is important for educators
to nurture the spirit of their students if they wish to bring transformational learning
to their classrooms. Using her experience as an educator, she argues that the
philosophy of ‘one-size-fits-all’ devalues students’ spiritual experiences and that
there needs to be a restructuring of the classroom to include the spiritual, which
allows students to connect to their home life, communities and lived experiences
outside of the classroom. Transformative learning means building trust and
community within the classroom where students feel safe to bring their spirituality
into their learning.
In Chapter 4, “Spirituality and its relevance for the contemplative educator:
Insights into the discourse of spirituality in education and sociological
implications”, Jennifer Motha works to highlight what she sees as the salient
conceptualizations of spirituality as a discourse and their relevance for the
contemplative educator. She draws on her own personal experience as an educator
as she explores the value of meditative practices and their value in life and in the
classroom.
Part three explores how spirituality is closely tied to cultural practices and what
this means for transformative education. In Chapter 5, “Spirituality: A philosophy
and research tool”, Njoki Wane explores the relational philosophy of Maat, an
indigenous African belief, to ask the question: What would research that embraces
spirituality look like? She emphasizes the need for a new framework that
reconnects the intellect, one that allows a researcher to bridge their inner and outer
knowing, and one that honors their humanity while incorporating high scholarly
standards in their research project.
In Chapter 6, “Spirituality and indigenous knowledge: Study of kototama and
decolonization in the school system”, Yumiko Kawano looks at how re-envisioning
xx
INTRODUCTION
spirituality through kototama (the “spirit of words”) can lead to the regaining of a
balanced mind. She examines the immense power of words and thoughts in re-
valuing suppressed knowledges and in re-valuing the spiritual aspects of students
which are inherently tied to language and indigenous knowledges. She warns that
spirituality is much like a knife, it can be used negatively to divide or harm others
or, if we use it carefully, as a useful tool.
In Chapter 7, “The role of spirituality in Maori and Tibetan villages”, Jia Luo
uses his research in Tibet to examine commonalities between the Tibetan and the
Maori response in indigenous communities towards the integration of indigenous,
mother-tongue education. He argues that notions of ‘quality’ must be evaluated
through the lenses of indigenous knowledge, spirituality and culture. He argues that
top-down development approaches to education are doomed to failure while
community driven responses will lead not only to maintenance of indigenous
traditions and languages but also to the enrolment and achievement goals that
policy-makers desire.
In Chapter 8, “The dialectics of Western Christianity and African spirituality”,
Akena Adyanga explores how spirituality and the related practices of healing,
sacrifices, and rituals are deeply rooted in the everyday life of the Acholi people of
Uganda. These practices and values have been devalued through Western
Christianity which has led to the destabilization of communities. Adyanga explores
to what extent syncretism is possible and the importance of indigenizing local
education systems as to value the community’s spiritual and indigenous practices
and knowledges.
Part four focuses on spirituality as intricately tied with personal experiences as
the authors explore meanings and implications of spiritual learning through the lens
of their own experience. In Chapter 9, “A spiritual journey in the academy: My
personal experience”, Energy Manyimo challenges himself to re-envision how he
conceives of African spirituality in the context of his spiritual journey as an
academic. He uses an Afrocentric and indigenous knowledges framework to
answer the questions: What is spirituality? Why is it important to practice
spirituality? When is it important to introduce spirituality in the education system?
How should it be introduced and by whom?
In Chapter 10, “‘My name in Mohammed but you can call me John’: Canadian
racism, spirit injury and the renaming of the indigenous body as a rite of passage”,
Aman Sium challenges the practice of re-naming and Anglicizing the names of
Indigenous people upon arrival in Canada. He shows the importance of naming in
Indigenous cultures and uses his own personal experience to show how the practice
of renaming is closely tied with policies of assimilation and racism and how it
results in spirit injury for Indigenous bodies. The relationship between renaming
and spiritual disconnection is explored in the context of Canada and the classroom
and explains why Indigenous people need to reclaim the history and past that is
represented in names and the process of naming.
In Chapter 11, “Holding relationships as sacred responsibilities: A journey of
spiritual growth and being”, Nadia Salter discusses how relationships are a vital
part of everyday life and how integrating spirituality into one’s life or educational
xxi
practices involves holding these relationships as sacred. Holding relationships as

sacred involves seeing everyone as interconnected and purposeful, honour, respect,
kindness and seeking harmony and balance with those around you. By honouring
these relationships we can nourish our whole being and provide spaces for others to
do the same.
In Chapter 12, “Spirituality: An interconnected path to healing”, Adelin Brunal
explores the histories of African Canadian communities and sees the need for
spirituality to act as a key component in the ‘re-education’ project of Black youth,
as a way to resist complacency and discourses of materialism. He sees spirituality
as a way to bring ‘oneness’ to both individuals and communities and as a positive
force of interconnectedness which enables the recognition and valuing of the
holistic individual.
In Chapter 13, “Spirit injury: The impact of colonialism on African spirituality”,
Jennifer Jagire looks at her personal experiences to show how traditional African
spirituality has been devalued by Western Christianity both in her homeland of
Uganda as well as in Canada. She argues that indigenous spirituality can be used to
disrupt hegemonic Western conceptions of spirituality as perpetuated in the
schooling system and can be a way of re-valuing the self and the past.
In Chapter 14, “The loss of my indigenous languages, as I lose, I struggle to
find”, Wariri Muhungi explores how, as an African Kenyan woman, the loss of her
indigenous languages has affected her emotional and spiritual well-being. She uses
critical autoethnographic and feminist lenses to explore her experiences of
colonization through schooling systems in Africa, Europe and North America.
Through these experiences the need for spiritually-centred education is examined
as a key feature of the struggle for personal liberation and socio-cultural meaning
within Eurocentric, dominant educational structures.
Part five looks at how spirituality can be mobilized and applied in various ways
and locations. In Chapter 15, “Religious fundamentalism, political power and the
colonization of spirituality”, Emily Antze examines the use of spirituality within
religious fundamentalist movements and explores how spirituality has been co-
opted for personal or group political gain. The exploration of power structures
within these movements reveal that individual expressions and outlets of
spirituality have been ‘colonized’ by organized religion. Antze explores
possibilities of decolonization, especially through classroom pedagogy, in hopes
that spirituality can be used to promote equality and harmony.
In Chapter 16, “Wisdom sharing and altered consciousness: A transformative
learning project”, Jennifer Richmond-Bravo argues that for transformative learning
to take place, educators must be willing to not only interrogate their own lives but
willing to look openly across lines of difference without prejudice. In dominant
Eurocentric society much of this difference has been appropriated, commodified
and used to further oppress minoritized peoples. Informed learning and
understanding can come through pedagogy that approaches learning as a
relationship and knowledge as something not to be consumed but received with
gratitude.
xxii
INTRODUCTION
Many of the chapters in this book deal intimately with the personal and
experiential nature of spirituality. While there are certainly some who will decry
this approach due to a perceived lack of academic rigour or objectivity, what we
seek to highlight is the rich and valuable work that is to be done in exploring how
spirituality affects each of us in unique ways and in ways that allow us to approach
the work of transformation, both in society and in schooling, in new and powerful
ways. The goal of the book is to explore connections both to aspects of our whole
selves that have been suppresses and subordinated within the academy and also to
others around us.
This project, Spirituality, Education & Society: An Integrated Approach is a call
for the creation of an academic community which sees the value of spiritual
knowledges in creating communities where compassion, hope and love are valued.
It is in these places that transformation becomes possible and where learning
becomes a healing, sacred process rather than the dehumanizing, consumptive
process that it so often is today. When spirituality is valued both as a personal
pursuit as well as a form of connection and relationship, space is created for
communities who value diversity and inclusivity. Educators who use spiritual
knowledge value the power that is found in diversity. Hopefully, as you read and
use the texts found in this book, you are taken in by both the diversity of the voices
as well as the common message that they are advocating: spiritual knowledge is an
irreplaceable aspect of the whole self and, if we are serious about transformative
learning, we must engage with this aspect of all learners.
REFERENCES
hooks, b. (2003). Teaching community: A pedagogy of hope. New York: Routledge.
Tracey, D. (2002). Student spirituality and educational authority. International Journal of Children’s
Spirituality, 7(22), 171-182.
Wane, N. N. (2009). Black Canadian feminist thought: Perspectives on equity and diversity in the
academy. Journal Race Ethnicity and Education, 12(1), 65-77.
xxiii
SUSANNAH COLE
1. SITUATING CHILDREN IN THE DISCOURSE

OF SPIRITUALITY
INTRODUCTION
How is it possible that I have an undergraduate degree in Child Development and

am completing my final course for a Masters in Education in Developmental
Psychology and I have only just been introduced to the validity of the concept of
‘other ways of knowing’? ‘Other ways of knowing’ explore alternative, non-
scientific ways of interpreting and understanding reality. Western scientific models
of knowledge production rely almost exclusively on linear theories and empirical
evidence that place logical reasoning as the definitive source of knowing. Spiritual
ways of knowing rely on intuition and wonder, aspects that Western scientific
models discount as taboo. My interest in writing about children’s spirituality has
arisen from the startling realization that my current knowledge of child
development is dangerously limited. Until now I have been led down a singular
path in my education. Without an appreciation for other ways of knowing, my
understanding of spirituality has been restricted. I believe that spirituality lies at the
core of our humanity and is a gateway to knowledge, not the obstruction that I’ve
been taught.
Imagine how different our lives might be if we approached each day with an
appreciation of ourselves as spiritual beings. Placing spirituality at the centre of our
lives opens a realm of possibility that leads to our deepest self. Everyone is
spiritual; however accessing this facet of our lives can be challenging if we are
taught as children to disregard our connection with spirit. Often, the innate spiritual
nature of children is disregarded because children are often perceived as immature
and selfish. Their ability to squeal in delight at the sight of something new or twirl
around in circles just to watch the world go by is viewed as frivolous and juvenile
rather than as an uninhibited expression of their innate spirituality. A child’s sense
of self is the source and origin of his or her spirituality. The experiences and
relationships children have in their lives will enhance and further their spiritual
development. When adults make space for and honour children’s authentic
expression they are accepting and nurturing children’s spirituality. Children’s
spirits grow when they experience a sense of belonging in, and interact within, an
environment that acknowledges and provides opportunities for diversity of
expression and critical reflection.
In Western society spirituality is not supported in the curriculum and
consequently our education system fails to socialize children’s spiritual identity.
Providing support to parents and educators to facilitate children’s spirituality
N. Wane et al. (eds.), Spirituality, Education & Society, 1–14.

© 2011 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.
SUSANNAH COLE
begins with knowledge building. Our understanding and teaching of child

development needs to incorporate spiritual development and adults need to apply
this knowledge in their relationships with children. In Western society we rely
primarily on traditional developmental theory that is purely evidence-based in
exploring the lives of children. Accordingly, our work with children often focuses
on the domains of development that are readily visible and externally measured.
Unfortunately, highlighting only the quantifiable elements of development negates
the ability to appreciate the multidimensional, interconnected, and dynamic nature
of spirituality. Our knowledge of child development becomes incongruent with the
lived experiences of children when we overlook the non-quantifiable spiritual
domain that encompasses internal elements and permeates the whole child. I will
introduce postformalism as a theory capable of expanding our understanding of
development. The theory of transformational learning will be applied as the vehicle
for developing greater insight into the complex nature of spiritual development and
deepening our awareness of our spirituality.
This chapter originated from my desire to holistically represent child
development – inclusive of spiritual development. As an Early Childhood
Educator, I have observed children and witnessed their spiritual nature. However,
my university texts neglected to mention spiritual development alongside physical,
cognitive, social, and emotional development. Until recently, I had never been
taught how to recognize or nurture a child’s spirit. I am writing from the
perspective of a white woman of European descent, who has benefited from all the
unearned privileges associated with my position. My knowledge of child
development is rooted in Western scientific thinking; thus only recently has it
occurred to me that my understanding of child development is limited and
exclusionary. Over the past few months, I’ve become aware that I’ve unwittingly
been working within a dangerous structure that relies on exclusionary and
oppressive processes that limit ways of knowing. This course has been my
introduction to theories related to epistemology, power structures, and oppression.
By challenging my privileged position, this course has opened my eyes to
opportunities for transformation.
According to Dei (2004), transformative learning is a form of education that
involves a “shift of consciousness that dramatically and permanently alters our
ways of being in the world” (p. 4). For learning to become transformational, it
needs to become more “inclusive, discriminating, self-reflective, and integrative of
experience” (Mezirow, 1997 as cited in Robinson, 2004, p. 112). I’m now
becoming increasingly conscious of privileged assumptions I’ve made about
children and how they grow and learn, and I’m questioning the supremacy of
Western scientific thinking. I am developing what Robinson (2004) refers to as
‘reflexivity’, or the ability to see my historical and cultural conditioning and its
influence on my worldview.
Through an exploration of transformational learning, I hope to address the
limitations of my knowledge by highlighting ways of knowing that transcend the
essentialist and reductionist tendencies of purely evidence-based developmental
theories. I am not proposing the complete discounting of Western scientific
2
CHILDREN IN SPIRITUALITY DISCOURSE
thought, as it is one valid source of information, but it does not provide a platform
to discuss the spiritual aspects of children’s lives. It is essential that the whole child
be valued in discussions of spiritual development.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
In this chapter I will be exploring children’s spirituality through a developmental

perspective. In Western society, developmental theory has predominantly focused
on notions of progress and evolution highlighting predictable, sequential, and
increasingly complex stages. Inherent in this perspective is the discounting of the
lower (child) stages in favour of the more developed stages of adulthood (Johnson,
1999). Mainstream Western society has been remiss in presenting developmental
theories that provide a holistic, fluid, and interconnected representation of
development. It is my position that fostering children’s spiritual development
requires an understanding and integration of both traditional developmental theory
as well as post-formal thinking. Specifically, children’s spiritual development will
be discussed using cognitive developmental theory to explore the ways in which
children perceive and interpret the world in relation to their spiritual nature. Jean
Piaget’s model of cognitive development will be presented as representative of the
traditional developmental theory, and Kincheloe and Steinberg’s (1993) theory of
postformalism will be used to provide a more expansive and inclusive perspective
of children’s cognitive development.
Jean Piaget was born in Switzerland and studied philosophy, psychology, logic,
mathematics, and biology. Ultimately, he dedicated himself to finding a biological
explanation of knowledge (Rathus & Rinaldi, 2009). His work has had a significant
impact in education over the past 30 years. His theories help shift long-standing
perceptions of children as empty vessels needing to be filled with knowledge to a
view of children as active builders of knowledge – little scientists who are
constantly creating and testing their own theories (Papert, 1999). At the core of
Piaget’s theories is a belief that looking carefully at how knowledge develops in
children can provide insight into knowledge production in general. Unfortunately,
Piaget’s significant and detailed achievements have been simplified and applied in
limited ways in education. The trend is to rely only on his four stages of cognitive
development in teacher education and curriculum development (Papert, 1999).
Piagetian cognitive theory highlights rational, logical ways of knowing and holds
them as the most sophisticated representation of knowledge production. Cognitive
developmental theory is primarily concerned with the individual and the
development of self (Kincheloe & Steinberg, 1993). We must ask ourselves if we
are limiting our understanding and interpretation of the world by dogmatically
following this model.
In contrast to Piaget’s cognitive theory, Joe Kincheloe and his life partner
Shirley Steinberg have developed a more contemporary theory of cognitive
development called postformalism, a theory that provides a more comprehensive,
inclusive, and expansive view of knowledge production (1993). Kincheloe as a
leading scholar in critical pedagogy who focuses his work on exposing unexamined
power relations that shape cognitive theory and educational psychology in an effort
3
SUSANNAH COLE
to create a psychology of possibility. Born in Tennessee in 1950 to parents who

were committed to social justice, he witnessed extreme forms of classism and
racism in the Southern United States during the 1950s and 1960s. These
experiences shaped his view of the world and helped to ground his theories with
the perspectives of those who have suffered at the hands of dominant power blocs
(Steinberg, 2009).
Postformalism posits that mainstream developmental psychology has
historically dismissed the cognitive abilities of those who do not fit in the dominant
white, middle and upper socio-economic and patriarchal classes. Postformal theory
is ideally suited to exploring knowledge production outside the realm of scientific
logical thinking because it is concerned with questions of meaning making,
emancipation, and processes of self-production (Kincheloe & Steinberg, 1993).
Kincheloe and Steinberg (1998) point out that White culture has used
Enlightenment ideologies, that place ‘reason’ as the ultimate human
accomplishment, to establish their superiority. ‘Whiteness’, they argue, has become
synonymous with rationality, which in turn has become synonymous with ‘the
good’. Similarly, they suggest that non-whiteness has often been identified with
irrationality and deficiency (Kincheloe & Steinberg, 1998). Post-formal thinking
addresses the limitations of knowledge based solely on science by demoting
‘reason’ to only one type of knowing. This model acknowledges various forms of
knowing by focusing on cognitive processes through the union of reason and
emotion. It draws from feminist theory and deconstructs the thought-feeling
hierarchy used by men to oppress women (Kincheloe & Steinberg, 1998).
Introducing post-formal thinking into the discussion creates a space to explore
intuitive ways of knowing as well as the emotional and relational elements of
spirituality. The integration of Piagetian cognitive theory and postformalism
represents a holistic and inclusive framework for an exploration of children’s
spiritual development. Once we are equipped with relevant knowledge that reflects
an inclusive understanding of children’s spiritual nature, it becomes imperative to
effectively apply this knowledge in our relationships with children and in our
educational practices.
Transformational learning theory represents a theoretical approach that provides
a framework for exploring relational dynamics that deepen our understanding of
our spiritual selves and its expression. This theory challenges individuals to reflect
critically on the ways in which they engage with and interpret the world (Belenky
& Stanton, 2000). Transformational learning is flexible and makes space for
fluidity in relationships by integrating a questioning approach that acknowledges
the changing nature of circumstances, people, and ultimately decisions (Belenky &
Stanton, 2000). Exploration is valued and answers are not forced when we use a
questioning approach in our self-discovery. Transformative learning can support
individuals to move “toward a more inclusive, differentiated, permeable, and
integrated perspective” (Mezirow, 1991, p. 155). When adults confront their own
limiting beliefs and assumptions, they are more capable of creating a space
inclusive of spiritual ways of knowing and therefore support and facilitate the
spiritual development of children.
4
In this chapter I will incorporate both my knowledge of child development from

a traditional developmental standpoint as well as apply post-formal thinking to my
understanding of children’s spiritual development with the goal of presenting a
holistic picture of the spiritual lives of children. From this perspective, I will
highlight how transformative learning can be used as a tool within the education
system to create an environment that supports and nurtures children’s spiritual
development.
SPIRITUALITY
The definition and interpretation of spirituality is largely dependent upon one’s

worldview. Adult assumptions about spirituality, which rely on rational thinking
and religious concepts, often hinder the ability to understand the spiritual nature of
children. Spirituality lies beyond rational conceptualizations and thoughts about
God (Hart, 2003). It is important for me to compile a definition of spirituality that
is inclusive of children. To this end, a constructive definition would provide a place
for all individuals to locate themselves as spiritual beings, regardless of age,
gender, race, ability, sexuality, or culture. Therefore, for the purpose of this
chopter, I will use the term spirituality to reflect a child’s development of self that
includes a search for meaning, transcendence, wholeness, and purpose (Love,
2001; Tisdell, 2003). The spirit of children is captured when spirituality is
understood as an “inexhaustible web of meaning interrelatedly connecting self,
other, world, and cosmos” (Myers, 1997, p. 109). Furthermore, the essence of spirit
is mysterious and experienced by children in moments of awe and wonder. For
Tobin Hart (2003) this mysterious quality of spirituality is an unquantifiable force
that animates and connects all things. He suggests that one cannot separate oneself
from this force because all aspects of life contain the essence of the whole.
Applying a definition of spirituality that reflects its personal nature allows for
inclusivity and helps to delineate it from religion that reflects a collective
expression. It can be problematic when the terms are applied interchangeably,
particularly in educational contexts. Although spirituality and religion are
interrelated, they do not necessarily overlap (Love, 2001). Spirituality refers to
something intimate and personal that helps children expand their understanding of
themselves and their place in the universe. Alternatively, religion refers to
institutional beliefs, codes, and rituals that provide structure or expression to
spirituality (Forster, McColl, & Fardella, 2007). Religion can serve as a sanctuary
that provides a sense of community, but it can also be experienced as oppressive
when it requires strict adherence to codes of conduct and claims to hold a
monopoly on the truth (Fernandes, 2003; Hart, 2003). Within education, children
need to be able to locate themselves and experience a sense of belonging within the
classroom. Incorporating various religious practices in the classroom becomes
problematic because exclusion is inevitable. In contrast, educational environments
that support spirituality reflect inclusivity and occur naturally when teachers
employ an open mind and are committed to critical reflection.
Although a child’s spiritual nature involves an inward experience that originates
in a connection to self, excessive individualism can get in the way of further
5
SUSANNAH COLE
spiritual development (Myers, 1997). To ensure that spiritual pursuits do not

become narcissistic or destructive, it is necessary to introduce the concept of
responsibility in the definition of spirituality. Fernandes (2003) reminds us that
although spirituality connotes a personal experience, it should not be considered
private because at its essence it is relational and therefore necessitates a
responsibility to self, others, and the world. This responsibility can be expressed
through daily activities, relationships, and actions that reflect a willingness to
engage in what matters most to us. Children need to be supported to explore their
spiritual identity, discover meaning for themselves and share their understanding of
the world with others.
CHILDREN’S SPIRITUAL WAYS OF KNOWING
To ensure the recognition and nurturing of children’s spirituality it is necessary to

understand how they experience and express their spiritual nature. Traditionally, in
Western society, child development has been conceptualized through the theories
of White, male psychologists such as Jean Piaget, Erik Erikson, and Lawrence
Kohlberg (Rathus & Rinaldi, 2009). These theories are characterized by
individualistic, linear, product-oriented thinking and are filled with Eurocentric
ideologies that espouse generalizations about the mind. They provide a structure
for understanding the quantifiable domains of development, but exclude spiritual
ways of knowing.
In particular, Piagetian cognitive theory is based on the notion that as children
progress through the stages of their lives, they construct knowledge in an orderly
fashion as their thinking becomes increasingly sophisticated. Although Piaget
claims that these cognitive stages are qualitatively different from each other, they
are presented as hierarchical and ultimately culminate in a mastery of formal
logical thinking. According to Piaget, children three to six years old are considered
to be in the preoperational stage of cognitive development. This stage is
characterized by intuitive and perception bound reasoning, caused by their inability
to decentre their thinking which leads to egocentrism and errors in logical thinking.
This stage is often referred to as an immature form of knowing. At age seven,
children enter the stage of concrete operations where Piaget argued we see the
beginning of adult logic; however, children are still limited in their reasoning by
their inability to deal with abstract concepts. A child’s logic remains bound by
reality because they rely on tangible, easily manipulated constructs. It isn’t until
Piaget’s final cognitive stage, formal operations, when children twelve years of age
and older become capable of sophisticated logical thinking characterized by
hypothetical, deductive reasoning. Piagetian cognitive theory regards this form of
logical reasoning as the highest level of thought, a level some individuals might
never attain (Rathus & Rinaldi, 2009). This linear portrayal of children’s cognitive
development is exclusionary and limits our understanding of the dynamic and
diverse nature of knowledge production. It is a reductionist view of childhood that
incorporates principles of universality and uniformity that are intended to reflect
normal childhood development. This brief overview of Piaget’s cognitive
6
developmental theory illustrates that it does not value subjective and intuitive
thinking and is grounded in a specific set of assumptions about the mind that
reflect a Western, male scientific point view. Devaluing knowledge that is viewed
as non-intellectual, illogical, and irrational fragments our understanding of spiritual
development.
Piaget’s cognitive theory has been criticized at several levels – for the purposes
of this paper, I’ve chosen to focus on just a few. First, his theory does not
acknowledge that children learn within multifaceted sociocultural environments
(Rathus & Rinaldi, 2009). We cannot understand the spiritual nature of children
without an appreciation of diversity and the importance of reciprocal learning
between children and adults. Second, Piaget has presented his work in the form of
a stage-theory, which inherently requires changes to be discontinuous (Rathus &
Rinaldi, 2009). Yet, children have innate knowledge and their cognitive abilities
are continuously developing and growing as they are introduced to new
experiences. Finally, the theory fails to mention integrating these cognitive abilities
to reflect an appreciation of both intuitive and logical thinking. In fact, Piaget
believed that for children to be truly rational, their development needed to move
away from emotions (Kincheloe & Steinberg, 1993). This belief is irresponsible
because an appreciation of children as spiritual beings is severely limited without
valuing emotion.
Spiritual ways of knowing delve into non-quantifiable domains related to
subjective, intuitive, and relational knowledge production (Shahjahan, 2006).
These domains are rarely discussed in current developmental psychology texts.
However, I have witnessed spiritual knowing in children and it is my belief that
spiritual knowing is the underlying source of cognition. Infants are born with
innate knowing and an ability to experience connection. Johnson (1999) suggests
that the roots of intelligence can be observed in an infants drive to seek and create
meaningful patterns and relationships. The connection between cognitive
development and spiritual ways of knowing is not a notion found in traditional
developmental theories. Through my own process of transformative learning I have
discovered several alternative perspectives of child cognitive development put
forward by Tobin Hart (2003), Alison Gopnik (2009), and Barbara Kimes Myers
(1997) that highlight spiritual ways of knowing.
Children show us the beauty of vulnerability with their honesty and remind us of
the simplicity of the moment when the mundane elicits awe (Hart, 2003). From the
moment of birth, children demonstrate empathy as they identify with the people
around them and literally take on the feelings of others. The roots of care and
compassion are evident early in our lives. Children have an incredible ability to
create and imagine long before they read and write. The touchstones for our
spiritual being are found in our childhood (Hart, 2003). Alison Gopnik (2009), a
psychologist and philosopher, believes that children are actually more intelligent,
thoughtful and conscious than adults. Children are not primitive adults gaining
perfection with age. They have different, though equally complex and powerful
minds, brains, and forms of consciousness. Children’s brains are wired to take in as
much sensory input as possible. They are capable of paying attention to everything,
which makes them successful at finding out about the world rather than just acting
7
SUSANNAH COLE
on it (Gopnik, 2009). Personal knowledge, based on feelings, is developed as

children explore the world through their senses. All knowledge is based on the
integration of personal knowledge (Myers, 1997). This open-ended intellectual
capacity should not be underestimated. I must construct my knowledge of child
development with multiple perspectives and theories to fully appreciate the
spiritual lives of children. Postformalism is representative of an inclusive theory
that expands my current knowledge of child development to include spiritual ways
of knowing.
Postformalism is informed by and extends Piagetian cognitive theory to include
social, interpersonal, and ideological concepts that form the basis of spiritual ways
of knowing. Unlike formal operational thinking, post-formal thinking is inherently
flexible because it recognizes that all theories, including itself, are historically
situated and socially constructed (Johnson, 1999). Understanding children’s
spirituality necessitates an appreciation of the individuality of expression and the
inevitability of change. Postformalism addresses questions of purpose, meaning,
human dignity, freedom, and social responsibility. It broadens our understanding of
thinking to include both constructed and innate knowledge and emphasizes
interconnected, dynamic, and intuitive modes of expression (Kincheloe &
Steinberg, 1993). For example, it draws from feminist theory to acknowledge
cognitive processes that are created by the union of reason and emotion. Within
this theory, emotions are viewed as essential in grounding our cognition and
providing insight where logic cannot (Kincheloe & Steinberg, 1993).
Creativity and spiritual knowledge are closely linked: they are intangible and
expansive in nature and involve exploring possibilities and producing meaning
(Villaverde, 1999). Creativity can be viewed as a core process that supports
spiritual knowing. Examining how formal and postformal models view the creative
process highlights an important distinction between these theories. Traditional
conceptions of the creative process rely on a mechanistic model that separates the
whole into pieces, whereas postformal thinking depicts creativity as an unfolding
of an implicate order through an integrative process (Kincheloe & Steinberg,
1993). Fluid rather than static processes facilitate spiritual development. The
formal view of the creative process reinforces convergent thinking – thinking that
brings together information focused on problem-solving, often with a single
answer. The postformal view of the creative process supports divergent thinking –
thinking that moves in many directions and involves a variety of aspects, often
leading to novel ideas and solutions (Kincheloe & Steinberg, 1993). The
cultivation of our spiritual awareness ideally occurs within contexts that welcome
the unknown and challenge individuals to reflect on their experiences with an open
and questioning mind. Postformalism represents a more inclusive description of
knowledge production that provides a framework for exploring children’s
spirituality. Postformal thought is intended to broaden our understanding of
cognition, a starting point in a search for a comprehensive view of cognition rather
than a definitive explanation of cognition (Kincheloe & Steinberg, 2003).
In the interests of presenting a variety of perspectives related to ways of
knowing, I conclude this section with a recommendation made by Mi’kmaq Elder
8
Albert Marshall. He proposes a blending of our ways of knowing into a new

worldview called “Two Eyed Seeing”. This worldview synthesizes scienctific
knowledge from traditional Aboriginal concepts and orthodox Western science. He
asks us to “learn to see from one eye with the strengths of Indigenous knowledges
and ways of knowing, and from the other eye with the strengths of Western (or
Eurocentric or mainstream) knowledges and ways of knowing … and use both
these eyes together, for the benefit of all” (Marshall & Bartlett, 2009). This
perspective offers insight into how our various ways of knowing can work together
to strengthen our understanding of our relationship to the world and ourselves. To
respect the spiritual nature of children, we need to acknowledge various
worldviews and teach children to remain open to new ways of knowing.
Developmental textbooks must present a more diverse representation of cognitive
theory. When our understanding of how children think and learn is expanded to
integrate various ways of knowing, our education system can create a place for a
child that acknowledges and even rewards authentic individual expression. It is my
belief that spirituality unfolds in a multitude of ways throughout our lives and
requires cultivation to bring into fullness.
SPIRITUAL EDUCATION
The current Western education system is not formally addressing spirituality.

Concerns related to the separation of church and state have led to fear around
explicitly labelling spiritual development. The education system has chosen not to
develop curriculum that directly speaks to spirituality (Kessler, 1999). In some
cases it is being incorporated in fragmented, informal ways but this tends to only
further indoctrinate students in White, Christian values rather than offer
opportunities for genuine spiritual expression. As a first step, educators can begin
to incorporate the word spirituality in their daily vocabulary and confront the fears
that arise as a result.
Recently I came across a book, Teacher, the Geranium on the windowsill died,
and you just kept on talking (Nieuwejaar, 2003). This title encapsulates the essence
of what is lacking in the spiritual education of children. It captures the palpable
nature of human experience that is felt deeply by children and reminds us of the
importance of being present in our relationships. Our teaching needs to be aligned
with the lived experiences of children. We have a responsibility to meet children
where they are, with a willingness to share openly. This requires us to cultivate an
attitude, both within ourselves and in our teaching practices, that encourages us to
appreciate and capitalise on meaningful moments. We need to be able to heed the
plant that died, the seed that sprouted, or the fragrance of the flower (Nieuwejaar,
2003). Adults and children are enriched when they have space to experience
complexity and simplicity, laughter and grief, and giving and receiving. If the
focus of our role as educators is on being in the moment with children, the
relationship will present mutual opportunities for learning.
Spirituality is often connected with experiences of awe, wonder and mystery,
but adults don’t always acknowledge the difficult emotions that often accompany
these experiences (Earl, 2001). In Western society, we ask children to deny who
9
SUSANNAH COLE
they are when we don’t make space for all their experiences. We teach them that
there is only one right way to live. Therefore, children progressively shut down and
hide parts of them that don’t fit with adult expectations, creating a ‘shadow’ (Hart,
2003). ‘Shadow’ can be described as the negative or undeveloped side of the
personality composed of characteristics people are denying (Earl, 2001). Hart
(2003) poignantly states: “shadow is created when we stand between ourselves and
our own light” (p. 179). Children don’t need to be rescued from difficult
experiences; they need a space that supports a range of experience. Neglecting to
address all the spiritual aspects of children’s lives sends them the message that the
most important aspects of their lives are not okay to talk about. It reinforces the
notion that life is about what we are told to know and not about what we know for
ourselves. Dei (2004) reminds us that when educators deny spiritual knowing,
either through a lack of awareness or an inability to engage with students on a
spiritual level, their teaching practices can become destructive rather than
liberating. Denial does not lead to wholeness; therefore, children who are restricted
in their expression are left without the support and encouragement they need to
meet their full potential (Hart, 2003). In accordance with my definition of
spirituality, I assert that spiritual education involves acknowledging and teaching
sacredness, respect, compassion, and connection.
I believe schools play a crucial role in shaping a child’s worldview, values, and
character through both visible and invisible means. Visibly, children are taught a
curriculum based on Western scientific principles that value logical reasoning and
emphasize individual achievement, competitiveness, materialism, and objective
knowing (Lindhom, 2007). Observable and measurable knowledge is highly
esteemed (Shahjahan, 2006). More dangerously, within the school system a hidden
curriculum reinforces compliance, competition, a single answer, and the notion that
authority and truth are found outside of oneself, in a teacher or textbook (Hart,
2003). Spiritual ways of knowing that include subjective and intuitive knowledge
are not acknowledged as valid forms of representation.
Western curriculum has become consumed with external variables and objective
solutions because these elements are easily quantified; whereas the internal realm
is often ignored or discredited (Palmer, 2003; Hart 2004). Shahjahan (2006) points
out that the view of the world as interconnected is made invisible and illegitimate
in our current education system. This leaves children with a feeling of emptiness
and a fragmented life that lacks purpose and meaning. In classrooms, students
often find themselves disconnected from the aspects of their lives that matter most
to them. What happens in relationships, the space between ‘you and me’, is often
lost in chaotic classroom environments (Hart, 2003). Theologian Martin Buber
wrote that “spirit is not in the I, but between the I and you. It is not like the blood
that circulates in you, but like the air in which you breathe” (as cited in Hart, 2003,
p. 67). This relational dynamic lies at the centre of our spiritual lives and forms the
basis for compassion and sense of community. To make space for this in the
classroom, teachers need to deepen their understanding of themselves and support
their students to do the same. Thomas Merton, a poet, social activist, and writer,
believed that “the purpose of education is to show a person how to define himself
10
authentically and spontaneously in relation to the world – not to impose a

prefabricated definition of the world, still less an arbitrary definition of the
individual himself” (as cited in Hart, 2003, p. 175). Our current Western school
system, with its visible emphasis on scientific ways of knowing and a hidden
curriculum that emphasizes conformity, ultimately serves to deconstruct children
rather than support their inherent capabilities. For education to become inclusive of
spirituality, educators must take responsibility and challenge both themselves and
their teaching practice to confront ideologies and systems that hinder genuine,
individual expression
Transformative learning is an ideal tool to examine personal beliefs, feelings,
and assumptions. When these beliefs are left unexamined or when educators take
the position that they are ‘all knowing’, the ability to relate honestly and
empathetically with children is impeded. The transformational process occurs
when educators engage in critical reflection aimed at creating a more inclusive,
discriminating, and autonomous perspective (Merriam, 2004). Reflecting on
experience is key to transformative learning. Experience alone does not constitute
transformative learning. Rather, it is the ability to critically reflect that shifts
everyday experiences into opportunities for learning (Merriam, 2004). For
educators to access their own spiritual nature they must be willing to engage with
experiences in their lives on a deeper level. Mezirow (1991) specifies premise
reflection, which involves examining socially constructed beliefs and assumptions,
as the only type of reflection that can truly lead to transformation. This type of
reflection requires educators to develop a level of comfort with contradictions so
that they no longer view inconsistencies as problems that need to be fixed. Instead,
educators learn to apply dialectic thinking that allows for acceptance of alternative
perspectives and different worldviews. As educators move away from unilateral,
rigid thinking, they open themselves up to the possibility of creating meaningful
relationships with children. Relationships rooted in honesty and compassion
honour the children’s spirituality.
Ultimately, nurturing the spiritual lives of children is about drawing out as
opposed to adding on (Hart, 2003). This notion reflects an underlying trust in
children’s innate spiritual nature and their ability to fully express themselves. From
this perspective, the adult’s role is not about filling children up from the outside by
downloading information into empty receptacles. Instead, spiritual education
requires an acknowledgment of children’s innate knowledge and the ability to
support their process of unfolding (Hart, 2003). The role of the educator in
supporting the spiritual development of children is to show children what they
already know and who they are rather than teach them what they think children
should know and who children should be. Educators validate self-discovery when
they accept children for who they are and create a free environment to imagine,
create, and experiment (Hart, 2003; Kimes Myers, 1997). As children develop an
understanding of themselves, connect with others, and ask questions about the
world, they are showing us their spiritual selves. Children develop as whole beings
in relation to people who love, listen, respond to, and guide them (Kimes Myers,
1997).
11
SUSANNAH COLE
DISCUSSION
The education system itself needs to engage in transformative learning. It needs to

reflect on what it is to see itself clearly, appreciate that other ways of knowing are
valid, and abandon exclusivity in favour of inclusive practices. How can we create
an education system that allows all children the opportunity to locate themselves
within the classroom without resorting to extreme individualism? Having
experienced transformative learning firsthand I am aware of the amount of time
and energy it requires to engage in critical self-reflection and confront my cultural
conditioning. Is it fair to ask educators to engage in transformative learning?
Would educators be willing and able to do it? In this paper I have argued that
transformative learning is an ideal tool for self-exploration and the development of
dialectic thinking. What other tools are accessible to educators to support spiritual
development?
The definition of spirituality and the methodologies used to study it also raise
some interesting questions. How can we define spirituality without describing it as
the antithesis of scientific? Michael Hogan (2009) argues in his paper, On
Spirituality and Education, that it is a mistake to ignore the scientific study of
spirituality and that we should find a way to synthesise the study of spirituality
with mainstream psychological science. Is this an appropriate avenue for the
exploration of spirituality, or should we concentrate on maintaining spirituality as
separate from science?
CONCLUSION
I conclude this chapter with an excerpt from a children’s novel by Margery

Williams, The Velveteen Rabbit (1922). It is a magical story that chronicles the
experiences of a stuffed rabbit in his quest to become real. This excerpt captures a
simple, yet profound conversation between two toys, the Rabbit and the Skin
Horse, which highlights the essence of what it means to be spiritual. Children can
connect with their spiritual nature when they are engaged in relationships that
value their inherent worth.
The Skin Horse had lived longer in the nursery than any of the others. He was
so old that his brown coat was bald in patches and showed the seams
underneath, and most of the hairs in his tail had been pulled out to string bead
necklaces. He was wise, for he had seen a long succession of mechanical toys
arrive to boast and swagger, and by-and-by break their mainsprings and pass
away, and he knew that they were only toys, and would never turn into
anything else. For nursery magic is very strange and wonderful, and only
those playthings that are old and wise and experienced like the Skin Horse
understand all about it.
“What is REAL?” asked the Rabbit one day, when they were lying side by
side near the nursery fender, before Nana came to tidy the room. “Does it
mean having things that buzz inside you and a stick-out handle?”
12
“Real isn’t how you are made,” said the Skin Horse. “It’s a thing that
happens to you. When a child loves you for a long, long time, not just to play
with, but REALLY loves you, then you become Real.”
“Does it hurt?” asked the Rabbit.
“Sometimes,” said the Skin Horse, for he was always truthful. “When you
are Real you don’t mind being hurt.”
“Does it happen all at once, like being wound up,” he asked, “or bit by
bit?”
“It doesn’t happen all at once,” said the Skin Horse. “You become. It takes
a long time. That’s why it doesn’t happen often to people who break easily,
or have sharp edges, or who have to be carefully kept. Generally, by the time
you are Real, most of your hair has been loved off, and your eyes drop out
and you get loose in the joints and very shabby. But these things don’t matter
at all, because once you are Real you can’t be ugly, except to people who
don’t understand.”
“I suppose you are real?” said the Rabbit. And then he wished he had not
said it, for he thought the Skin Horse might be sensitive. But the Skin Horse
only smiled.
“The Boy’s Uncle made me Real,” he said. “That was a great many years
ago; but once you are Real you can’t become unreal again. It lasts for
always.” (Williams, 1922, p. 1)
Challenging my cultural conditioning has expanded my understanding of children’s

spiritual development. Valuing other points of view has finally allowed me to
create a fluid, inclusive, and reflective perspective that is capable of not labeling
‘other’ as less than. Abandoning the practice of diminishing ‘other’ has opened up
the possibility of experiencing ‘all’ as valid. This allows me to experience
spirituality as intrinsic to being human.
Western society needs to establish an education system that facilitates the
development of the whole person. It is our responsibility to create environments
that nurture children’s spirituality by engaging with them in the process of learning
instead of presenting them with a packaged understanding of the world. By
adopting a receptive and compassionate position, educators create opportunities for
children to transform. Trusting that learning is transformative gives children the
freedom to develop their spiritual lives.
REFERENCES
Belenky, M. & Stanton, A. (2000). Transformative learning as relational, or connected learning: A
missing dimension – Getting ready for transformative learning. Retrieved on March 1, 2010 from
http://transformativelearningtheory.com/Relational.html.
Dei, G. (2004). Spiritual knowing and transformative learning. Research Network for New Approaches
to Lifelong Learning (pp. 4-16).
Earl, M. (2001). Shadow and spirituality. Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 6(3), 277-288.
Fernandes, L. (2003). Transforming feminist practice: Non-violence, social justice and the possibilities
of a spiritualized feminism. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books.
13
SUSANNAH COLE
Forster, D., McColl, M., & Fardella, J. (2007). Spiritual transformation in clinical relationships between
social workers and individuals living with disabilities. Journal of Religion & Spirituality in Social
Work: Social Thought, 26(1), 35-51.
Gopnek, A. (2009). The philosophical baby: What children’s minds tell us about truth, love, and the
meaning of life. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Hart, T. (2003). The secret spiritual world of children. Maui, HI: Inner Ocean.
Hogan, M. (2009). On spirituality and education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4, 138-143.
Johnson, A. N. (1999). Spirituality: Post-formal thinking, spiritual intelligence and the paradox of the
developmental journey (pp. 146-173). In S. R. Steinberg, J. L. Kincheloe, & P. H. Hinchey (Eds.),
The post-formal reader: Cognition and education. New York: Falmer Press.
Kessler, R. (1999). Nourishing students in secular schools. Educational Leadership, 56(4), 49-52.
Kincheloe, J. L., & Steinberg, S. R. (1993). A tentative description of post-formal thinking: The critical
confrontation with cognitive theory. Harvard Educational Review, 63(3), 296-319.
Kincheloe, J. L., & Steinberg, S. R. (1998). Addressing the crisis of whiteness: Reconfiguring white
identity in a pedagogy of whiteness. In J. L. Kincheloe, S. R. Steinberg, N. M. Rodriguez & R. E.
Chennault (Eds.), White reign: Deploying whiteness in America (pp. 3-30). New York: St. Martin’s
Press.
Lindholm, J. (2007), Spirituality in the academy: Reintegrating our lives and the lives of our students.
Wiley InterScience Online. Retrieved from www.interscience.wiley.com.
Lopez, M. (1999). Evaluation: The dangers of standardized testing of young children: A post-formal
alternative. In S. R. Steinberg, J. L. Kincheloe, & P. H. Hinchey (Eds.), The post-formal reader:
Cognition and education (pp. 294-312). New York: Falmer Press.
Marshall, A., & Bartlett, C. (2009). Co-learning re: “Talking and walking together” of indigenous and
mainstream sciences. Presentation for Collaborative Environmental Planning Initiative. Retrieved
December 5, 2009, from http://www.stackpool.com
Mazama, M. A. (2002). Afrocentricity and African spirituality. Journal of Black Studies, 33(2), 218-
224.
Merriam, S. B. (2004). The role of cognitive development in Mezirow’s transformational learning
theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 55, 60-68.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Myers Kimes, B. (1997). Young children and spirituality. New York: Routledge.
Nieuwejaar, J. (2003). The gift of faith: Tending the spiritual lives of children. Boston, MA: Skinner
House Books.
Papert, S. (March 29, 1999). Jean Piaget. Times Magazine: The Centuries Greatest Minds, p. 105.
Palmer, P. (2003). Teaching with heart and soul: Reflections on spirituality in teacher education.
Journal of Teacher Education, 376-385.
Rathus, S. A. and Rinaldi, C. M. (2009). Childhood & adolescence: Voyages in development (1st
Canadian Edition). Toronto, ON: Nelson.
Robinson, P. (2004). Meditation: Its role in transformative learning and in the fostering of an integrative
vision for higher education. Journal of Transformative Education, 2(2), 107-119.
Shahjahan, R. (2006). Spirituality in the academy: Reclaiming from the margins and evoking a
transformative way of knowing in the world. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in
Education, 18(6), 1-23.
Steinberg, S. (2009). Joe Kincheloe Bio. Retrieved March 1, 2010 from http://www.freireproject.org.
Tisdell, E. (2003). Breaking the silence: Defining spirituality and culture identity in transformative adult
higher education. Journal of Transformative Education, 1(4), 368-392.
Villaverde, L. (1999). Creativity, art, and aesthetics unravelled through post-formalism: An exploration
of perception, experience, and pedagogy (pp. 174-205). In S. R. Steinberg, J. L. Kincheloe, & P. H.
Hinchey (Eds.), The Post-formal Reader: Cognition and Education. New York: Falmer Press.
Williams, M. (1922). The velveteen rabbit. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell.
14
ERIC J. RITSKES
2. CONNECTED: INDIGENOUS SPIRITUALITY AS

RESISTANCE IN THE CLASSROOM
INTRODUCTION
An ever increasing body of work is emerging within the pedagogical arena that
explores the realm of spirituality and its implications within a classroom (Tisdell
and Tolliver, 2006; Groen, 2008), in curriculum (Fraser, 2004), for student
development (Love, 2001; Kessler, 1999; Hindman, 2002), or within the academy
as a whole (Shahjahan, 2006; Rendon, 2000). The emergence of this body of work
stems from what is perceived as an ever widening chasm that separates Western
education from the “whole person”, suppressing and silencing aspects of student
life that are important in the quest for a holistic education experience. This chapter
examines the definitions of spirituality that are emerging out of this Western
educational discourse and contends that the current definitions undermine the
collective power of spirituality by centering the individual as the sole locus of
spiritual determination in a sort of spiritual solipsism. The current discourse of
spirituality has been born out of resistance to organized religion and its coercive,
imperialistic endeavors but, in rejecting the organized structures of religion,
spirituality has engaged in the other extreme, namely Western liberalism and its
dogmatic emphasis on individual rights – throwing any notion of collective
spirituality out with the proverbial bath water.
I will argue that any definition of spirituality needs to acknowledge the value of
connection, as conceived in indigenous spirituality, as vital and inherent to its
being: a connection to all aspects of the self, connection to one’s community,
connection to history, and connection to a higher power or larger framework. It is
through this connectivity that spiritual power is constructed and spiritual resistance
is empowered and without it, spirituality falls prey to individualism and relativism.
Finally, I will attempt to elucidate some of the implications that such a
collaborative spirituality might have on the classroom and the academy. The
impetus for spirituality to be brought into the classroom is based on a desire for
change to how we educate, a desire to resist the current patterns of thinking and,
according to Kessler (1999), a desire for connection.
I come to this topic from a position of spiritual and mental struggle. Not only do
I struggle to locate myself within the discussion of resistance and spirituality but I
also struggle with the possibility of being able to locate myself at all. I recognize
and am aware of my full participation within the discourses of Western domination
that I am implicated in through my skin color (white), my heritage (European), my
religion (Christian), my gender (male) and my sexuality (heterosexual). I do not
N. Wane et al. (eds.), Spirituality, Education & Society, 15–36.

© 2011 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.
ERIC RITSKES
posit these influences as something apart from who I am, in some sort of nebulous
“out there” (Howard, 2006), but recognize that I come from a position of
illegitimate privilege and who I am is embedded in domination. While not
overlooking the influence that these locations have on my work, I also understand
the difficulty of discovering how they influence my work (though undoubtedly they
do) as well as the challenge in locating what I have left unsaid; what remains
hidden is undoubtedly the most insidious. While I cannot escape these locations,
my work hopefully resists against these discourses from within them; as Dei &
Asgharzadeh (2001) clearly state: it is not possible to claim impartiality or
indifference and I do not choose to do so. As Budd Hall (2000) states in his preface
to Indigenous Knowledges in Global Contexts, “I can’t change my race or gender,
but I am able to shape my approach to my work” (p. xiv). My move or shaping,
then, is one of resistance. This resistance comes not in the form of the post-colonial
which not only falsely demarcates periods of oppression, but as Dei (2000) also
argues, post-colonial discourses disturbingly ignore the histories and lived realities
of indigenous peoples. So instead it is an anti-colonial resistance that I choose to
mobilize, one that seeks to challenge and ultimately bring down colonial
relationships within society through epistemologies of the colonized.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
The anti-colonial framework that I apply to this chapter seeks to both affirm
indigenous ways of knowing while at the same time interrogating the intersections
of power and knowledge that are inherently imbedded in any type of knowledge
production. This framework also recognizes that knowledge does not reside in one
site or location but is produced as a result of multiple, localized lived realities and
experiences. This position avoids succumbing to the post-modern tendency to
oversubjectify individual voices or experiences and rather chooses to recognize the
value of individual experience within the framework of collective histories, as Dei
(2005) states: to see unity in diversity. Knowledge, then, is bound up not only in
the individual but also in the collective and communal identities, in recognizance
of the multitude of flows and cycles that occur in knowledge production. Not only
does this framework challenge how knowledge is created but also how totalizing
theories are used to simplify complex realities, choosing instead to focus on the
fluidity and flexibility of a discursive framework (Dei & Asgharzadeh, 2001).
I theorize colonial here, not strictly in its historical context nor as alien and
foreign, but more broadly as discourses and forces of domination, imposition and
exploitation. This approach does not seek to devalue, homogenize, or misrepresent
the unique qualities of the historical representations of colonialism that were
imposed on indigenous groups by Western nations but rather argues for more
nuanced approaches and interrogations of how different forms of colonial power
have been enacted in different ways, in different locations, in different times, in
different spaces, and how these might work in conversation with each other. There
is a caution here in creating an ‘umbrella’ term that veils the intricacies of its many
members but, in recognizing this danger, there must be the move away from
16
INDIGENOUS SPIRITUALITY AS RESISTANCE
homogenizing the issues and towards giving each colonized body a voice and
many allies to raise their voice in unison with. Not only this, but in eschewing false
dichotomies, an anti-colonial approach does not seek to set up the colonizer as
‘other’, aware of the dangers in setting up such dichotomies and recognizing the
spectrum and complexities inherent in domination.
In light of these complexities, resistance is viewed in localized ways and as
embedded within daily actions and choices, with the understanding that
“colonizing practices can be unending and deeply embedded in everyday relations”
(Dei, 2005, p. 273). An anti-colonial framework seeks to explore these various
manifestations of colonization to uncover similarities and differences that might be
of value in the resistance of and the dismantling of colonial powers. This approach
also seeks links and alliances between those who resist domination in different
forms (gender, class, race, disability, etc.) in an effort to explore how lived realities
are shaped by multiple forms of power relationships. It rejects any singular
approach to anti-oppression and supports solidarity in the struggle against the
multiplicity of dominations.
In seeking to affirm indigenous knowledges, of vital importance is to theorize a
‘working definition’. In constructing a ‘working definition’, an anti-colonial
framework recognizes the fluidity and ever-changing nature of knowledge while
challenging the Western discourses that seek to fix, categorize, contain and reify;
as Battiste (2000) argues, “The quest for universal definitions ignores the diversity
of the people of the earth and their views of themselves” (pp. 36-37). An anti-
colonial framework also recognizes that “at each arrival at a definition, we begin a
new analysis, a new departure, a new interrogation of meaning, new
contradictions” (Davies, 1994, p. 5). This process of arrival/departure, in relation to
indigenous knowledges, resists being defined by others which has too often been
the case as Western academies and discourses have tried to contain and define
indigenous knowledges and bodies in order to dominate and control them; it allows
indigenous people to define for themselves what ‘indigenous’ means.
In defining indigenous knowledges, too often the tendency has been to locate it
solely in the past and to fall prey to what Macedo (1999) calls a “blind
romanticism”. Locating indigenous knowledges in the past only serves to reify and
enclose, to position indigenous knowledges as out of sync with ‘modern’ times, as
a relic to be discarded for something better. Instead, I seek to define indigenous
knowledges along the lines of Dei, Hall and Rosenberg (2000) who not only
associate indigenous knowledges with the long-term occupancy of a certain place
but define it as, “The sum of the experience and knowledge of a given social group
[which] forms the basis of decision making in the face of challenges both familiar
and unfamiliar” (p. 6). Indigenous knowledges are dynamic rather than static,
constantly being created and re-created in the face of new obstacles, experiences
and locations, yet never losing what makes it ‘indigenous’. Indigenous knowledges
are created in relation to a specific location or place but, just as colonialism
uprooted indigenous peoples it also uprooted their knowledges which are
constantly adapting, creating, re-creating and persisting (Purcell, 1998). In falling
prey to a blind romanticism or static definitions rooted solely in past or place, not
only are indigenous knowledges reified but a false dichotomy is imposed in which
17
ERIC RITSKES
indigenous knowledges are posited in direct opposition to Western knowledge. As

Dei (2000) states, indigenous knowledges do not sit in pristine fashion outside of
other knowledges; an anti-colonial framework recognizes the collaborative and
cumulative processes involved in knowledge production and calls for a more
nuanced interrogation of how knowledges interact with each other in a constant
process of creation and re-creation.
Indigenous knowledges also seek to work with the power of diversity. The term
‘indigenous’ encompasses a wide array of knowledges, cultures, peoples, and
locations (Wane, 2008). Roberts (1998) argues that indigenous knowledges
develop through an in-depth understanding of relationships to a specific place and
Dei (2000) states that indigenous knowledges are operationalized differently
depending on history, environment and context. It is in the fluidity and openness of
indigenous knowledges where all of these localized knowledges find their meeting
point. There is recognition of multiple origins of knowledge and the multiplicity of
ways that knowledge is operationalized, as well as an understanding of how
knowledge is much like a river with many tributaries, ever expanding and
overflowing its boundaries, constantly charting new courses and paths. This is not
to so easily dismiss the realization that differences are prone to be homogenized
within such an overarching concept as indigenous knowledges but rather to call for
close interrogations and appreciations of diversity which will recognize that, even
within such a wide scope there are common threads to be found which bring
diverse peoples together under the banner of ‘indigenous’.
An anti-colonial framework also recognizes that schooling is not innocent and
that it has historically played an important role in colonizing indigenous groups; in
producing and re-producing inequality along the lines of gender, race, culture,
class, religion, and language; and in “miseducation”, as Renato Constantino sees it:
We see our present with as little understanding as we view our past because
aspects of the past which could illuminate the present have been concealed
from us. This concealment has been effected by a systematic process of
miseducation characterized by a thoroughgoing inculcation of colonial values
and attitudes. (qtd. in Macedo, 1999, p. xv)
Institutes of education, sanctioned by the state, serve to further the agendas of the
state and social structures of exploitation (Dei & Asgharzadeh, 2001). This chapter
recognizes that education has been used to silence and subsume the voices and
knowledges of indigenous people, divorcing them from their histories; still it
chooses to view education as a key site of resistance, giving indigenous peoples
agency and power to resist even within systems of domination.
Finally, anti-colonial discourse is a discursive framework, a dialogue. It is a
process rather than an arrival. This is especially apparent as I struggle to attenuate
my position in this chapter; I am acutely aware of how little I know about what I
am doing and I echo Hanohano (1999) in stating, “[I am] begging your compassion
as I stumble on – for I don’t know anything” (p. 210). As Dei (2000) argues,
learning is not always about acquiring new knowledge but working with the power
18
of not knowing, of revealing the knowledge that has always been within you but
obscured; hopefully this chapter works towards bringing this type of personal and
public revelation. Spirituality and the anti-colonial framework are also closely tied
to humility and I approach this project with the highest level of regard for those
who have ‘gone before’ and have struggled with the topic before me, as well as
holding the humble hope that I can add to the discussion.
This anti-colonial framework is particularly important to this chapter, not only
in its focus on epistemologies of the colonized but also in its understanding of how
all aspects of knowledge, from literature to politics to spirituality, come together to
create social understanding (Dei & Asgharzadeh, 2001). An anti-colonial
framework recognizes the power in struggle and resistance, as well as in
celebrating the spiritual aspects of life through art, literature and oral traditions, as
a way to move beyond a preoccupation with victimization as well as a way to
incorporate the language of hope. Finally, it recognizes the power of the
‘indigenous’ in creating and sustaining resistance to dominant forms, recognizing
the power of working with fluid and ever adapting definitions and realities.
DEFINING SPIRITUALITY
Defining Spirituality through Individualism

Equally important to this project is how we are to define spirituality. Prior to the
last century, Western spirituality was not conceived of outside of religion,
originating out of Christian tradition and scriptures, specifically from the idea of
the Holy Spirit (Schneiders, 2003). Even today, the issue of how to conceptualize
or define spirituality as a distinct concept apart from religious frameworks seems to
be primarily based in ‘first-world’, Western locations. What has caused this shift
towards conceiving of spirituality outside of religion? In line with Schneiders’
(2003) argument, I argue that spirituality has been separated from religion as a
response to perceived problems with religion; its exclusivity, its rigid ideology, and
clerical systems are all at odds with a (post)modern society’s image of self and
society. Yet, despite this perceived failure of religion, within the self there is a
desire to find a meaningful life path which consequently leads to a desire to
continue the search for meaning outside of the frameworks of religion. This
extraction of spirituality from religion has been aided by society’s move to what
was considered rational, secular, and scientific thought, as well as a move towards
the explicit separation of church and state – a separation of private matters from the
public sphere. In rejecting everything religion had to offer, the locus of Western
spirituality moved from the congregational to the individual, from the public realm
to the private realm. This conceptualization of spirituality drew heavily from
spiritual traditions in other parts of the world, appropriating what was useful in a
sort of religious consumerism (York, 2001). What was taken was divorced from its
contexts and used to confirm Western desires. These forms of spirituality were
transplanted into Western society as exotic and different, being positioned as a
counter-discourse to the hegemonic influence of religion, as an alternative way of
19
ERIC RITSKES
reaching personal fulfillment. Spirituality could be the positive force to counter the
ills of religion.
This polarization of spirituality and religion is evident in society as a whole and,
as a microcosm, in schooling and the academy. There has been an explicit
dichotomization that posits spirituality as acceptable, personal, liberating, and as a
mature entity while religion is demonized as institutional, constraining and childish
(Johnson, Kristeller, and Sheets, 2004). Spirituality was born as a counter-
discourse or resistance to the hegemonic, restrictive reigns of religion but, in the
process, it created its own regimes of truth, its own definitions, and its own
dominant discourse (Foucault, 1978; Estanek, 2006) which not only appropriated
indigenous traditions into a ‘spiritual stew’ but, in defining itself through
individualism, silenced the voices of communities and other collective groups. Any
notion of collective spirituality was silenced through a discourse of individualism.
The emergence of spirituality as its own discourse has provoked a large body of
work that has struggled to define exactly what spirituality is: as Palmer (2003)
states, “Spirituality is an elusive word with a variety of definitions – some
compelling, some wifty, some downright dangerous” (p. 377). Most definitions are
understandably broad and abstract as they try to accommodate all varieties of
spirituality, attempting to negotiate the connections between religion and
spiritualityand yet facilitate a divergence. The common thread in these attempts is a
focus on the individual as a locus for ‘authentic’ spirituality. By placing the locus
of spirituality in the individual there is room to accommodate a multiplicity of
spiritualities, little need to come up with a clear definition of what spirituality
entails, and also a clear delineation from the congregationalism of religion. Bennett
(2003) states that spirituality is the organizing story or force of one’s life, Hindman
(2002) takes the approach that spirituality is who we really are inside, which agrees
with Chittister (1990) who argues that spirituality is what we are and how we act.
These definitions emphasize the individual and are in line with many of the
definitions emanating from recent research in spirituality (Rose, 2001; Love, Bock,
Jannarone, and Richardson, 2005; Palmer, 2003). To find an ‘authentic’ spirituality
one must be able to discover the ‘authentic’ self – the approach and direction is
inward. Personal spirituality is independent of other people and their spiritualities;
the histories, forces and discourses at work around the individual; and independent
of any realm outside of the core self. The primary concern is with moving inward.
This affirmation of individualism is in line with Western society’s move toward
secularization and liberalism. York (2001) defines secularization as a society-wide
decline of interest in organized religious traditions. As spirituality is freed from the
rules of religion it becomes a fluid and disparate entity. For Western society this
has led to an upswing in spirituality, as seen in the New Age movement which
views the individual alone as the “locus for selectivity and determination of belief”
(York, 2001, p. 366). Secularization and spirituality are in this way tied together in
promoting individualism in the model of Western liberalism. York (2001) goes on
to argue that this Western New Age spiritualism is an outgrowth of Western
capitalism (the ‘religious consumer supermarket’) and falls into the same traps as
Western liberalism in denying difference through individualism in effort to further
20
hegemonic culture. It was this culture of consumerism and individualism that has
led writers to explore spirituality as a cure or alternative in the first place, but
instead of escaping the Western hegemonic discourse they are merely reproducing
it within this new discourse of spirituality.
This self-dependence and individualism are not completely insular in that they
ignore any type of relationship but, rather, in that they place all relationships as a
secondary effect. It is only after a discovery of the authentic self that it is possible
to look outward to relationships in other realms; spirituality is “how I live at the
center of who I am. I live at a center with an image of who I am, how I am
embodied and in touch with the concrete …. My spirituality is the way I live at my
center … [italics mine]” (Johnson, 1983, p. 252). This spirituality has self at the
center of the formation and not until the self is uncovered can the individual
understand their relationships with the world around them. Schneiders (2003)
argues that this inward-outward thrust “implicitly defines spirituality as a private
pursuit for personal gain, even if that gain is socially committed” (p. 177). To put it
simply – spirituality as it is conceived here is limited by self; as Rendon (2000)
states, “I can make a difference for others only if I make a difference for me” (p.
11). As a private gain it is reproducing Western liberalism, secularism, and
capitalism within the discourse of spirituality.
The primacy of ‘me’ is connected to the search for an ‘authentic self’ or, as
Robinson (2004) calls it a “solid me” (p. 108). As alluring as it is to think that there
is something pure and discoverable within all of us, this argument ignores the
always ongoing construction and fluidity of self. There seem to me to be three
areas that need to be troubled in this search for the ‘authentic self’. First, the search
for authenticity promotes a spiritual hierarchy of “more authentic” and “less
authentic” which is inherently fragmentary and marginalizing rather than unitary.
Those who have ‘attained’ a certain level of authenticity can claim priority in
spiritual discussion and the voices of those who are ‘not spiritual enough’ are
silenced. Second, in the search for what is pure and innocent within us, the
multiplicity of forces and discourses that interact with us and through us are
ignored, especially in the ways that they might shape our journey or even our
“authentic self”. Third, in imagining such an authentic core, the self and spirituality
are seen as static, unchanging, and contained when, as I will argue later, this is
exactly the opposite of how we need to view spirituality. As our life experiences,
perceptions, feelings, and understandings of spirituality change, are we moving
away from our authentic spiritual core or is it rather a move towards spirituality as
a connected, fluid, uncontained identity?
Defining Spirituality through Connectedness

My intended goal with this chapter is not to negate the self but to remove it from
the center of the grid. Spirituality needs to be viewed as a connected experience
where the individual is one node in the web of existence or, perhaps to use an
indigenous American image, merely one point in the Circle of Life. Spirituality
cannot be summed up, as Tisdell and Tolliver (2006) state, as “an individual’s
journey to wholeness” (p. 38). There has to be a recognition that everything is
21
ERIC RITSKES
connected, that each individual is connected to others in their communities,

connected to the past and those who have gone before, connected to frameworks or
entities larger than themselves, and connected to the future through their actions
and relationships in the present. These relationships do not develop out of the self
but are part and parcel of a reciprocal relationship with the individual; we cannot
conceive of our spirituality without looking at relationships and how they mould
us. Kinchloe (2006) states, “Knowledge production and the construction of
selfhood cannot take place outside of this intricate web of relationships” (p. 188). It
is not an inward movement that should be primary to spirituality but an opening of
the self to accept and embrace the forces and relationships at work all around us.
At the same time, this chapter is not trying to set up another dichotomy in
self/other but is interested in viewing both as interlocked or interwoven with each
other.
This sense of connectedness is vital to ideas of indigenous knowledges and
spirituality and I argue, that in promoting this connectedness, this is one way that
indigenous knowledges and spirituality can be used as a methodology of resistance
in the academy. Mazama (2002) argues that a central tenant of indigenous
spirituality is that everything in life and death (humans, plants, objects, ancestors,
events) is imbued with a common essence that binds us all together. Hanohano
(1999) states that every aspect of indigenous life is saturated with the spiritual and
the purpose of life is simply to be. Dei (2002b) understands indigenous spirituality
in terms of collective empowerment, the ability to relate to others without
preconceived motives, and listening to the self and world rather than the
“hegemony of me”. Dei (2002b) goes on to say that, “The individual develops a
spirituality through the engagement of society, culture and nature interrelations” (p.
5) and that the individual only makes sense within the context of community (Dei,
1993). Kinchloe (2006) argues that “A human being simply can’t exist outside the
inscription of community with its processes of relationship, differentiation,
interaction, and subjectivity” (p. 192). In this light, spirituality is not a journey into
the self to find an authentic core but rather an unveiling of the self to recognize the
multiplicity of relationships that we interact with and that interact through us. It is a
breaking down of the ‘hegemony of me’ and the rebuilding of the self through
relationships.
Again, I feel the need to reiterate that indigenous spirituality does not seek to
obscure or destroy the self but rather seeks to destroy the self/other dichotomy in
which it is possible to conceive of the self as autonomous and separate from the
larger collective (Dei, 2002b). I do not wish to set up the binary of
dependence/independence but rather to look in a more nuanced way at what might
be called mutual inter-dependence; a reciprocal spiritual relationship whereby,
through relations we connect and shape others and, at the same time, are re-shaped
and impacted by others. This is a fluid spirituality that progresses, grows, is aware
and is constantly struggling to resist and break free from the relations that seek to
control or dominate it. It resists the urge to place self at the center. In a mutual
inter-dependence, the self cannot be negated or expunged but only exists in the
context of connections.
22
HOW ARE WE CONNECTED?
The connections that I am talking about in regards to spirituality can be focused

broadly around four main categories: connections to communities, connections to
history and the past, connections to larger frameworks, entities or mysteries, and
connections to one’s whole self. I purposefully use the plural form of connection to
note the multiplicity of relations that can spring out of infinite lived realities and
the multiplicity of connections that we all have in varying forms. These categories,
upon closer interrogation, are neither clearly delineated nor definitive, each bleeds
into the others and outside of these borders. Yet, by looking at these connections
separately, hopefully it is of at least some heuristic value.
Connections to People and Communities

To be connected to the people around you means to be connected through shared
language, shared location, shared experiences, shared culture, or shared
environment. The idea of a shared language is central to ideas of spirituality as
language is more than simple communication and the imposition of foreign
languages have been used to divorce people from communities, culture and
spiritual connections. Chrisjohn, Young and Maraun (1997) argue that it is through
language that peoples “come to know, represent, name, and act upon the world” (p.
338). Almeida (1998) sees language as the thread between generations through the
knowledge passed down by the elders. The imposition of foreign languages has
divorced people from their connections and given them a new, colonial framework
to work within (Wane, 2008). In terms of spiritual connections, Simpson (2004)
argues that by translating traditional narratives into colonial languages, knowledge
and people are separated from the spirituality, its source and meaning. Language is
the thread that connects spirituality to everyday lived realities.
The indigenous concept of embodied, active learning is critical to this
connection as well, as people interact in physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual
ways with one another – often all at the same time. This is evidenced in the daily
interactions of people in communities through actions such as healing rituals that
are themselves imbued with meaning, knowledges, and spiritual connections
(Wane, 2008). These connections are not always explicit as they might be in a
healing ceremony and often don’t need to be as the fluidity of meaning is implicitly
recognized by the community. It is the community, through its practical realities,
rituals and ceremonies that direct and illuminate the pathways into the inner self
and into a greater understanding of mystery and sacred knowing (Ermine, 1995).
Spirituality in this sense cannot be extracted from the lived realities of the people
and communities; Portman and Garret (2006) describe how in many indigenous
languages there is not even a word for spirituality or religion as something
separable from existence. It is these lived realities of communities that impact and
shape who we are as spiritual beings.
In the spiritual connection to communities there is also a spiritual interaction
and connection to place and environments. Almeida (1998) argues that it is the
land that is the physical core that connects communities and if it is lost, so too are
23
ERIC RITSKES
the languages, knowledges, and spiritualities. Hanohano (1999) describes how

specific locations or sites are imbued with spiritual essence and power; Dei’s
(1992) study views land as the bridge between the living and the dead for
indigenous cultures; Dei (2002a) describes how land transcends into the
metaphysical realm through the giving of life, sustenance, and spiritual strength;
Holmes (2000) states that the Earth is the voice and humans the listeners, Ilmi
(2010) explains how land can be sacred and spiritually cleansing; and Portman and
Garret (2006) look at how a harmonious relationship with nature is essential for
being a whole spiritual self. This connection to the land resists Western scientific
discourses that conceptualize the land and people as separate entities, choosing
instead to see humans as one link in the vast chain of nature, intimately connected
to earth, sky, water, animals, and plants (Wangoola, 2000). The land is much like
family and evokes a language of love that resists Western discourses that are tied to
the land, discourses of economy and exploitation (McIsaac, 2000). Not only this,
but it resists universalizing and reductionist Western scientific discourses that seek
to divide, measure, and control the earth, in the process not only fragmenting the
earth into various ‘extractable resources’ but also fragmenting knowledge and
space (Ermine, 1995; Purcell, 1998).
The intention here is not to ignore some of the inherent problems in theorizing
community as a singular, homogenous entity. Daniels (2009) argues convincingly
how community has been constructed as a male dominated space through memory
and ‘his-story’, ignoring and omitting the contributions and voices of women. This
gendering of memory is a result of the colonial frameworks that created the public
space and, consequently, the history created in them, as a male space (Oyewumi,
1997). Also, Gujit and Shah (1999) show how the term ‘community’ has been used
as a ‘Trojan horse’ by the western development agenda to cloak and validate
Western development aims, all the while ignoring the complexities and diversity
that are inherent in any community. Not only this but to view community as a
static, enclosed entity only enforces the insider/outsider binary, making the
community a type of elitist club whose members hold the key to an essentialized
‘community’ knowledge. The community is fluid and often disparate as people
move in and out and choose to play greater or lesser roles. To envision boundaries
of a community, especially in today’s globalized space where communities and
connections can span the globe, is an impossible task. Fluidity and difference is
often seen as disruptive and threatening, silenced in the name of cooperation but, as
Dei (2005) argues, we need to recognize that there is strength in the diversity of
communities. This is not to advocate for the opposite extreme of complete
fragmentation and attenuation of differences but to advocate for the explicit
recognition of communities as open, diverse spaces in need of meaningful ways of
understanding the complex structures of relationships.
Connections to History and the Past

Gearon (2001) clearly articulates that spirituality cannot be seen in ahistorical
terms. Two key elements of this connection in regards to indigenous spirituality
24
are: connection to the elders who are the “repositories of knowledge from time
immemorial” (Hanohano, 1999), as well as connection to the ancestors that have
gone before. This connection to history is an important one as it actively
participates in the decolonizing project. Fanon (1963) examines how colonization
sought to distort and misrepresent the past, divorcing people from their histories.
Linda Smith (1999) argues that a vital part of the decolonization process is “about
recovering our own stories of the past” (p. 39). This spiritual connection to the past
through elders and ancestors is a reconnection to, or reclamation of, hidden
histories and obscured memories. I am not trying to position a sort of authentic or
romanticized ‘past’ that is the basis for validity but positioning the role of history
along the lines of Lattas (1993) when he states that, the past needs to be recreated
and viewed “as a way of formulating an uncolonized space to inhabit” (p. 254).
Longwood, Muesse and Schipper (2004) recognize the use of older mentors in
spiritual or religious development but the indigenous connection to elders is based
on more than a student/mentor relationship. Holmes (2000) looks at how land was
given voice through the elders, blood memory was kept alive, and heart knowledge
was expressed; all of these coming together to form an ancestry of experience. It is
this lived experience of those who have gone before which shapes our spiritual
self, as Holmes (2000) explains: it is through the elders that knowledge lodges in
the heart. Hanohano (1999) calls the elders repositories of knowledge from time
immemorial, Kirkness (2002) speaks of giving voice to the ancestors through the
knowledge of the elders, and Garrett (1996) sees elders as parent, teacher,
community leader, and spiritual guide. The elders then are important mediators in
spiritual connections and, subsequently, in knowledge production; as Holmes
(2000) describes in regards to indigenous Hawaiian peoples, knowledge is a gift
from a higher power which is then revealed and contextualized through
relationships.
Not only is there a connection to the elders but to those in the community that
have passed on. Dei (1993) and Mazama (2002) examine how indigenous African
cultures view life and death as inherently linked and how the ancestors’ role in the
community is to guide and protect the living. Mayuzumi (2006) looks at how
connection to the ancestors through the Japanese tea ceremony is how Japanese
women can connect with history and create and expand one’s spiritual space. Being
able to connect to common ancestors is also critical in symbolizing the social unity
of a community (Dei, 1993). This connection speaks to how the present cannot be
theorized without another dimension; it is never as simple as what you can see.
This connection is also vital in the resistance to Western ideas of time and
boundaries; those who have passed on slip in and out of the present, the past
experience actively informing the knowledge production of the present. Spirituality
is not only mutually inter-dependent with events in the present but also with history
as symbolized by the lived experiences of the elders and ancestors.
Connections to Larger Frameworks, Entities or Mysteries

Tisdell (2003), in part two of her seven part definition of spirituality, talks about
connectedness to the “Life Force, God, higher power, higher self, cosmic energy,
25
ERIC RITSKES
Buddha nature, or Great Spirit” (p. 28) but, in the indigenous understanding, this
connection goes deeper than simply recognizing a higher power. It is recognition
that beyond the physical, knowable world is something larger than the conceptual
ordering of community and individuals, a world too full to talk about. This
connection highlights an awareness of an alternative framework that exists beyond
the tangible and scientific. Portman and Garrett (2006) show how Native American
peoples believe that all things are alive and have spiritual energy; everything has a
connection to this alternative framework which exists in balance with the physical.
This connection to higher mysteries speaks through silence, subverts traditional
modes of verification, can be felt through intuition, dreams or visions, and is
experiential. It is unquantifiable and ever-changing; the Great Mystery.
This connection is often understood and expressed through creative expression,
through songs and chants, proverbs and storytelling, rituals and ceremonies, again
pointing to the value of indigenous languages in these forms. Wane (2005) states
that rituals take us beyond our social locations and positioning to allow us to
interconnect at a higher level, as well as allowing us to move beyond the part of
self that wants to restrict possibilities. Portman and Garrett (2006) explain that
Native American traditional ceremonies are designed to keep the self in good
relations with those around them and with a higher power. Oral forms of
communication, such as singing, poetry and storytelling, communicate a
connection to something higher, another dimension that is not easily explained in
the words themselves and often the only way of expressing what is ‘unsayable’.
The spiritual connection is emphasized through the personal connections and
context of these oral events and narratives, as Lakota chief Harold Dean Salway
said, “You have a tendency to lose some of the spirituality when it’s down in black
and white” (qtd. in Barringer, 1991, p. 1).
This connection exists outside the realms of Western scientific discourses and
resists their ordering of the world through the traditional senses, adding a spiritual
sense. It also resists how history and knowledges are viewed, in that they are not
embedded in the text (the story, the song, the poem) but enacted upon through the
telling or the performance, they are both engaged in and derived from social
activity (Cohen, 1989). In the indigenous context, knowledge of the higher realm is
revealed through performance which acts as a bridge between the physical and the
spiritual dimensions. Not only this but rituals and storytelling explore the
intricacies of the community in ways that cannot be done otherwise, exploring the
interplay between personal and collective, the intertwining of spiritual and
physical, and the mixture of mythology and history. This spiritual connection to a
higher realm is always an exploration, always a process rather than an arrival, and
always shrouded in mystery; still, through its very denial of definable boundaries it
plays a role in resistance. Ward (1990) states, oral narratives and its listeners do not
“seek to construct from the text a unified meaning; rather [they are] attentive to the
text’s refusal to mean” (pp. 88-89).
26
Connections to One’s Whole Self

Spirituality is not a separate entity that can be extracted and examined separately
from the other aspects of life, it weaves its way through every aspect, from the day-
to-day physical actions (Graveline, 1998), to sexuality (Love, Bock, & Richardson,
2005), to how we think (Shahjahan, 2006). Our spirituality is shaped through the
influences that are placed on our emotions, our bodies and our mind; they cannot
be separated. This is the recognition that everything we do is tied to our
spirituality, that every breath we take is at one moment both physical and spiritual,
both mental and emotional. Spirituality cannot be cocooned away and divided from
other aspects of life, it is in everything we do and everything we are. This
connection is aptly conceived in the idea of the First Nations sacred circle which
typically represents seven directions of which one is the center or the core
(Portman & Garrett, 2004; Cajete, 1994). It is through the integration of the core
with the other directions (east, south, west, north, upper/Sky, lower/Earth) that
spiritual harmony and balance are achieved.
This is the place for individual agency within the community, for self-
empowerment within the web of relationships. As Malidoma Somé (1994) argues,
“Each one of us possesses a center … The center is both within and without. It is
everywhere” (p. 199). A communal spirituality is not the negation of the self to the
capricious whims of the community or a higher power but an exploration of self
through the lens of relationship and connection to communities and higher powers.
These connections provide a way to place the self physically, historically and
spiritually. As iterated before, these connections cannot be neatly examined or
categorized as they intermingle and affect one another. The connections are not
static over time or space; they are constantly changing as we live our own realities
and others live their realities beside us. There is no strict delineation of self and
community, they converge and diverge at specific moments, never escaping each
other. This is part of the beauty of spirituality.
DISCUSSION: SPIRITUALITY AS RESISTANCE
The previous sections have explored how ideas of a connected indigenous

spirituality are in opposition to the hegemonic, individualistic discourses of
spirituality. Putting this in discussion with an anti-colonial framework necessarily
entails envisioning spirituality as resistance. Each previous section has briefly
touched on how indigenous spirituality and its connections can be used as
resistance but a concerted effort must now be made to explore exactly what this
means.
Both Said (1993) and Fanon (1963) argue that colonial discourses never “give
anything away out of goodwill” (Said, 1963, p. 207). Said goes on to argue that the
colonial must be forced to yield its control through political, cultural and physical
battle, to which I would add as an aspect of cultural struggle: the spiritual struggle.
In regards to indigenous spirituality, Graveline (1998) argues that “inter-
connectedness is a necessary resistance strategy” (p. 46). The power of a collective
indigenous spirituality needs to be brought to bear in resistance against dominant,
27
ERIC RITSKES
imperialistic discourses which seek to posit their knowledge as the only valid form.
Dei and Doyle-Wood (2006) see indigenous spirituality as an active and
“revolutionary spirituality” that is vital to the anti-colonial project. Spirituality is
not resistance simply as a defensive stance to hegemonic Western discourses but it
is also constructive, giving ways and spaces to explore power/knowledge
relationships through connections and working towards restoring the language of
hope. I do not seek to put forward a romanticized notion of resistance and struggle
for the sake of struggle; it is not a grand movement or popular uprising but a
collection of everyday choices that cumulatively and incrementally build for social
change. I also am aware of Foucault’s (1978) assertion that resistance is never
external to power and that there needs to be nuanced understandings of how
resistance works in relation to structures of power.
Weedon (1987) posits that everything we do is either in compliance or
resistance to dominant discourses and, consequently, how we perceive spirituality
is an important form of resistance. Through connectedness we resist the Western
liberal discourse of individualism that posits science and Western rationality as
primary. In choosing an indigenous spirituality of connectedness, we are creating
space for multiple ways of knowing, for a renewed understanding of the common
relationships that we share, and opportunities to interrogate why we see the world
as we do. Dei (2002b) states that spiritual knowledge “simultaneously upholds
‘objectivity’ to the subjective experience and similarly some ‘subjectivity’ to the
objective reality” (p. 7). It breaks down binaries and begs for more nuanced and
multi-faceted approaches to reality. Gearon (2001) clearly states, “A spirituality of
dissent resists easy assimilation into the systems of cultural representation … and
always presents a challenge to the systems which control such representations” (p.
296).
RESISTANCE WITHIN THE CLASSROOM
How can a spirituality of resistance be brought into a setting such as the academic
classroom where knowledge is closely controlled and validated through dominant
Western discourses? How can a spirituality that is rooted in activity and experience
make the transition to the classroom where learning is normally passive? Finally,
how can a spirituality that is connected to a wide range of forces move to the
Academy where knowledge is divorced from its connections and where knowledge
is commodified and individualized? These are the questions that arise when
resistance happens both ‘within and against’ dominant discourse and institutions
such as the Western academy.
Indigenous knowledges and spiritualities resist being labelled, reified and
corralled into a curriculum. The goal is not to learn about indigenous spiritualities
but to learn through them, to use them, and to embody them. Dei (2000) states,
“indigenous knowledges do not ‘sit in pristine fashion’ outside of the effects of
other knowledges” (p. 111); they are meant to be used as methodology rather than
be subject-ed to a book, lesson plan or discipline. The separation of spirituality
from practical application, schooling and other forms of knowledge only furthers
28
the problematic beliefs that spirituality can be sequestered or ignored as part of the
whole person. Through methods of indigenous spirituality, community and
connections can be encouraged and fostered, collaborative forms of knowledge can
be affirmed, space can be created for individuals to feel connected, and a greater
understanding of how spirituality can exist outside of the private sphere can be
built.
By talking about integrating indigenous spirituality in the classroom there is the
recognition that this resistance is still within the dominant discourses and systems
of education and is, in this way, limiting (Foucault, 1978). This has been a popular
topic among anti-colonial and anti-oppression scholars, can the ‘master’s tools’
dismantle the ‘master’s house’? Anti-colonial writers such as Fanon (1963) have
recognized the implications of setting up colonized/colonizer binaries that ignore
the complexities within them and to separate spirituality and indigenous
knowledges from the academy does the same. Dei (2000) calls the academy one of
the most important starting places for decolonization work, a place to lodge a
sustained critique of Western domination. I agree that to create spirituality and
indigenous knowledges as outside of the academy only serves to create rather than
dismantle binaries, yet this does not mean accepting the system as flawless; as Dei
(2000) poignantly puts it, it is not about “opening the ‘club’ to new members, but
rather, examining the whole idea/structure of the club” (p. 119). It involves looking
for ways to create a framework where knowledge can be created collaboratively,
multiple groups and individuals centered, and mutual inter-dependence affirmed.
I will put forward three ways in which I believe indigenous spirituality can be
mobilized and affirmed in a classroom setting to resist dominant classroom norms,
whether it be at the primary schooling level, secondary schooling or in institutes of
higher education.
Recognizing and Affirming Difference

Connected spirituality is not a homogenizing, essentializing, Western liberal
‘multicultural’ project and its goal is not to integrate spiritualities or philosophies
to create a “world-culture” (Nakagawa, 2000) nor to posit a sort of spiritual
universalism (Beck, 1999). It resists a Eurocentric dominance that masquerades as
unity or tolerance of diversity; the kind of token multiculturalism that Rushdie
(1992) calls “teaching kids a few bongo rhythms” (p. 137). In a connected
spirituality, instead of being ignored, hidden, essentialized, romanticised or
reduced to stereotypes, difference is valued and appreciated. Dei (2002) states that
it is the teacher’s role to “candidly explore all the emerging contestations,
contradictions and ambiguities in peoples’ lives” (p. 7). The multiplicity of
identities in a classroom cannot be ignored because the student’s lived experiences
and their spiritual journey affect how they will create knowledge in the classroom.
The power of difference needs to be embraced and explored.
Students can be challenged to interrogate how their identity is formed by
relationships, how they are spiritually connected to a wide range of relationships,
and how these concepts affect how they perceive and learn. Not only must we
openly accept the interrogation of identity but, as educators, we must illuminate the
29
ERIC RITSKES
connections and relationships that ground the learner to the larger historical,
political, and spiritual contexts (Dei, 2002). This interrogation needs to go beyond
superficial difference, that is often currently paraded, and towards examining
individual particularities. This is not to promote a fragmentation around
individualism or to succumb to relativism but to understand that individualism can
be explored within the context of connectedness and community. It is through
relationships that individuals are shaped and formed; we need to learn how to
explore these relationships in new ways that go beyond what we have done to this
point.
Affirming Collaborative Learning

Collaborative learning begins when the teacher/student dichotomy is broken down
in a positive way that allows for everyone to contribute their lived experiences to
the process of knowledge building, regardless of position or credentials. It
recognizes that each student brings their unique spirituality to the classroom and
recognizes the dynamic and fluid qualities of knowledge production. In
recognizing student’s individual spirituality, the classroom becomes a space to
learn about individual stories and daily resistances, showing us the complexities of
daily changing power structures (Abu-Lughod, 1990). The classroom is
deconstructed as a space of abstraction, objectivity and rationality, as something
removed from the messy realities of domination. This begins with self-
investigation on the part of the teacher or educator. Dei (2000) calls the
decolonization project one of self-implication and Howard (2006) emphasizes the
importance for educators of voicing one’s story of implication in colonial
processes; decolonization begins with decolonization of the self, which as Wane
(2006) describes, is much more of a process than an isolated event. Educators need
to reflect on their own connections to colonialism and resistance and to place
themselves within the webs of relationships and spirituality.
This collaborative process can even extend beyond the walls of the classroom to
include the community in the process of knowledge production, demonstrating
again that knowledge is not contained within the academy or controlled by a
certain group; as Dei (2002) states, collaborative processes “present communities
as active, spiritual subjects, resistors and creators” (p. 8). This does not imply the
need for “service learning” models, as McNally (2004) suggests, that thrust
students into communities without examining the power dynamics. Projects such as
these only posit communities as something to observe or to use as a step on the
journey to personal fulfillment instead of recognizing the value of the knowledge
that they have to offer or viewing them as co-creators and an integral part of
knowledge production. Indigenous learning and spiritualities are embodied and
active, they do not sit pristinely in the classroom nor flow in the unidirectional
teacher to student flow – they are alive and multi-directional. Collaborative
learning illustrates this to students and deconstructs the power of the teacher as a
holder and dispenser of knowledge.
30
In this process of deconstructing the learned/learner dichotomy, collaborative

learning also becomes a process where questions become as important as answers.
There is recognition that there can be multiple answers to a single question,
multiple questions to be asked, multiple ways of asking the same question and the
definitive answer to these questions does not always come from those in positions
of power. Again, this is not a relativist approach but one that opens the doors for
students to see possibilities and gives them a chance to find value for themselves.
In affirming the connected aspect of spirituality and learning, questions can be the
door to allowing students to explore how these connections affect and shape who
they are as spiritual beings.
Creating a Space of Openness and Belonging

Spirituality cannot simply be introduced to a classroom as a subject or something
to be learned from a book. Groen (2008) notes that classes on spirituality are
increasingly being offered in professional faculties such as nursing, business or
education but spirituality needs space to be active beyond a specific curriculum, a
space to allow for an embodied learning experience. One way to do this is to create
what Kessler (1999) calls “an authentic community”, a space of openness where
students feel comfortable exploring their relationships and connections. It is also a
space that allows for different experiences and is open to new possibilities in
exploring spirituality, such as through play, creative learning such as art or drama,
story sharing, or even silence. Dei (2005) calls for schooling that allows an open
space for each student to be able to connect with their past, their present
environment, their history, and to which I add, their spirituality and possibilities.
Spirituality cannot be forced into a curriculum or onto students, spiritual
experiences cannot be manufactured through certain techniques or exercises, and
awareness of connections cannot simply be shown. What educators who are
interested in bringing spirituality into classroom spaces can do is provide
possibilities and spaces which are safe for students to explore for themselves.
In creating such a space, spiritual characteristics such as compassion, respect,
and contemplation can be encouraged and explored in the context of connection.
Instead of presenting learning as a competitive, individual pursuit leading to
personal gain, education needs to be viewed as an endeavor to uncover and
understand our connections, to understand how they shape who we are, and how
we can create resistance through connectedness. As hooks (2003) argues,
“conventional education teaches us that disconnection is organic to being” (p. 180).
A connected spirituality ruptures the conventional. Spirituality creates community
and shared experiences through humility, empowerment and dialogue, opening up
a space for learners to belong to knowledge production.
Creating Space for Active, Embodied Learning

As Cajete (1994) argues, students are often ‘refitted’ to the system that caused the
problem in the first place rather than looking at refitting the system to the students.
In integrating spirituality into the education system, spaces need to be created for
31
ERIC RITSKES
active, embodied learning which will challenge the system in place and allow space
for each student to ‘fit’ in their own way. Cajete (1994) looks at an indigenous
centered curriculum “Creative Process: The Centering Place,” that takes students
out of the traditional classroom and engages them with nature, history, philosophy,
community, mythology, and the whole self in ways that make the knowledge active
and alive. The students interact within the community and within nature in ways
that allow them to explore spiritual connections. Thinking of an active, embodied
spiritual learning will sometimes entail thinking outside of the box of the
educational system, of the classroom, and the assigned curriculum in an effort to
provide an inclusive education that centers each student and allows them to explore
their spiritual and whole selves.
Within the classroom, games can bring students together and help them grow
connections, art can help them encounter processes steeped in meaning and
mystery, and having students bring in objects that have spiritual meaning for them
to discuss with the class can be positive ways of promoting a connected spirituality
through embodied learning (Kessler, 1999). Stories and songs, both the process of
creating them and performing them, can help to convey the connections between
the spiritual and the physical. Collaborative projects of creation can show how
individuals work within the frameworks of community. These activities should not
be confined to ‘fine arts’ or ‘drama’ but can inform dialogue across the disciplines;
as David Hanlon (2003) argues, “History it seems to me can be sung, danced,
chanted, spoken, carved, woven, painted, sculpted and rapped as well as written
…” (p. 30). Wane (2006) describes a group activity that she does with her class
that involves collaboration and tangible examples of how colonial violence severed
and distorted tradition knowledges and realities. Cajete (1994) describes a process
where art, biology and mythology are brought together to allow students to explore
their connections to Mother Earth and the interplay of the elements through
painting, sculpting, journal writing, storying and other art forms. Active spiritual
learning cuts across the disciplines and refuses to be subject-ed.
CONCLUSION
The spiritual resurgence that we are seeing in the academy is important in being
able to produce an education system that allows for the participation of the whole
self but without the proper emphasis placed on connectedness this spirituality loses
its power of resistance and reproduces dominant Western liberal discourses of
individualism. Not only are we connected to individuals around us but we are
connected to history through those who have gone before, connected to larger
frameworks beyond what we can empirically prove, and connected to our whole
self. The beauty of bringing spirituality into the classroom is that there is no
formula or set method but an infinite amount of possibilities that are dependent on
the connections of the individuals within the class. There is no amount of reading
or learning on the topic of spirituality that can ensure students will emerge with a
greater understanding of their spiritual connections; when spirituality is used as a
32
methodology what can be given to students is a space and the tools to use, if they
so choose.
Bringing a connected spirituality into the classroom is never simple as it
necessarily interacts with the messy world of reality; as Battiste (2000) states,
“Indigenous knowledge is the way of living within contexts of flux, paradox, and
tension, respecting the pull of dualism and reconciling opposing forces” (p. 42).
Spirituality is not intended to be separated from reality or to sit in “pristine
fashion” outside of other forms of knowing, it is meant to be used and to be
constantly created and re-created in context of each individual’s connections with
each other (Dei, 2000). ‘Working definitions’ and fluid boundaries become vital as
spiritualities interact and constantly create and re-create knowledges. It is in the
understanding of our mutual inter-dependence and our enactment of it that
resistance gains power.
A spirituality of resistance also moves away from the language of victimization
and negative criticism towards something constructive and creative; as Wane
(2008) recognizes, “It is imperative that I stop spending my time critiquing the
totalizing forms of western historicism and engage in the discourse of possibility,
where the missing voices and knowledges can be heard and validated” (p. 194). If
resistance is to be meaningful and sustainable it needs to stop constantly
responding to criticisms and critiques and to engage in positive ways with other
voices who seek constructive resistance, strengthening and building up alternative
systems of education, ways of viewing spirituality, and ways of knowing. This
involves sometime being quiet and listening to the multiplicity of voices and
experiences in each classroom. This approach is not asking educators to don the
proverbial rose-colored lens but to work toward empowerment through positive
construction, moving towards hope, and embracing possibility.
This chapter presents no definitive answers or strategies but, hopefully, rather
connections and possibilities to be explored further by teachers, administrators, and
educators. A connected spirituality encourages the spirit of exploration as we seek
to uncover the relationships that shape who we are and how we can positively work
within these relationships, resisting those that seek to dominate and encouraging
those that seek to promote peace and openness. The classroom is a vital space in
working toward spiritual understanding and in giving individuals a place to safely
explore the many connections that they bring to the community. We need to
embrace the complexity of these connections and struggle to create safe spaces for
exploring these complexities; this is the journey of a connected spirituality.
REFERENCES
Abu-Lughod, L. (1990). The romance of resistance: Tracing transformations of power through Bedouin
women. American Ethnologist, 17(1), 41-55.
Almeida, D. A. (1998). Indigenous education: Survival for our children. Equity & Excellence in
Education, 31(1), 6-10.
Barringer, F. (1991, January 8). Faded but vibrant, Indian languages struggle to keep their voices alive.
New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/1991/01/08/us/faded-but-vibrant-indian-languages-
struggle-to-keep-their-voices-alive.html?pagewanted=all. Retrieved October 28, 2010.
Battiste, M. Y. & Henderson, J. (2000). What is indigenous knowledge? In Protecting indigenous
knowledge and heritage (pp. 35-56). Saskatoon: Purich.
33
ERIC RITSKES
Beck, U. (1999). World risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.
Bennett, J. B. (2003). Academic life: Hospitality, ethics, and spirituality. Boston: Anker.
Cajete, G. (1994). For life’s sake – The spiritual ecology of American Indian education. In Look at the
mountain: An ecology of indigenous education (pp. 42-73). Kivaki Press.
Chittister, J. (1990). Wisdom distilled from the daily: Living the rule of St. Benedict today. San
Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco.
Cohen, D.W. (1989). The undefining of oral tradition. Ethnohistory, 36(1), 9-18.
Christjohn, R. D., Young, S. L., & Maraun, M. (1997). The circle game: Shadows and substance in the
Indian residential school experience in Canada. Penticton, BC: Theytus Books.
Daniels, D. (2009). Community history as a male-constructed space: Challenging gendered memories
among South African Muslim women. Diaspora, Indigenous, and Minority Education, 3(2), 81-95.
Davies, C. B. D. (1994). Black women, writing and identity: Migration of the subject. London:
Routledge.
Dei, G. J. S. (2005). The challenge of inclusive schooling in Africa: A Ghanaian case study.
Comparative Education, 41(3), 267-289.
Dei, G. J. S. (2002a). Learning culture, spirituality and local knowledge: Implications for African
schooling. International Review of Education, 48(5), 335-360.
Dei, G. J. S. (2002b). Spiritual knowing and transformative learning. The Research Network for New
Approaches to Lifelong Learning, 4-16.
Dei, G. J. S. (2000). Rethinking the role of indigenous knowledges in the academy. International
Journal of Inclusive Education, 4(2), 111-132.
Dei, G. J. S. (1993). Indigenous African knowledge systems: Local traditions of sustainable forestry.
Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 14(1), 28-41.
Dei, G. J. S. & Asgharzadeh, A. (2001). The power of social theory: The anti-colonial discursive
framework. Journal of Educational Thought, 35(3), 297-323.
Dei, G. J. S. & Doyle-Wood, S. (2006). ‘Is we who haffi ride di staam’: Critical knowledge/multiple
knowings – Possibilities, challenges, and resistance in curriculum/cultural contexts. In Y. Kanu
(Ed.), Curriculum as cultural practice: Postcolonial imaginations (pp. 151-180). Toronto:
University of Toronto Press.
Dei, G. J. S., Hall, B. H., & Rosenberg, D. G. (2000). Indigenous knowledges in global contexts:
Multiple readings of our world. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Ermine, W. (1995). Aboriginal Epistemology. In M. Battiste and J. Barman (Eds.), First Nations
education in Canada: The circle unfolds (pp. 101-112). Vancouver: UBC Press.
Estanek, S. (2006). Redefining spirituality: A new discourse. College Student Journal, 40(2), 270-281.
Fanon, F. (1963). The wretched of the earth. New York: Grove Press.
Foucault, M. (1978) The history of sexuality: An introduction, Volume 1. New York: Vintage Books.
Fraser, D. (2004). Secular schools, spirituality and Maori values. Journal of Moral Education, 33(1),
87-95.
Garrett, M.T. (1996). Reflections by the riverside: The traditional education of Native American
children. Journal of Humanistic Education and Development, 35, 12-28.
Gearon, L. (2001). A spirituality of dissent: Religion, culture, and post-colonial criticism. International
Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 6(3), 289-298.
Graveline, F. J. (1998). Resistance theorized: The Native perspective. In Circle works: Transforming
Eurocentric consciousness (pp. 33-48). Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.
Groen, J. (2008). Paradoxical tensions in creating a teaching and learning space within a graduate
education course on spirituality. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(2), 193-204.
Gujit, I. & Shah, M. K. (1999). Waking up to power, conflict and process. In I. Gujit & M. K. Shah
(Eds.), The myth of community: Gender issues in participatory development (pp. 1-23). London:
Intermediate Technology Publications.
Hanlon, D. (2003). Beyond ‘The English method of tattooing’: Decentering the practice of history in
Oceania. The Contemporary Pacific, 15(1), 19-40.
Hanohano, P. (1999). The spiritual imperative of Native epistemology: Restoring harmony and balance
to education. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 23(2), 206-226.
Hindman, D. (2002). From splintered lives to whole persons: Facilitating spiritual development in
college students. Religious Education, 97(2), 165-182.
34
Holmes, L. (2000). Heart knowledge, blood memory, and the voice of the land: Implications of research
among Hawaiian elders. In G. Dei, B. Hall, & D. Rosenberg (Eds.), Indigenous knowledges in
global contexts (pp. 37-53). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
hooks, b. (2003). Teaching community: A pedagogy of hope. New York: Routledge.
Howard, P. S. S. (2006). On silence and dominant accountability: A critical anticolonial investigation of
the antiracism classroom. In G. J. S. Dei & A. Kempf (Eds.), Anti-colonialism and education: The
politics of resistance (pp. 43-63). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Ilmi, A. (2010). Living the indigenous ways of knowing: The African self and a holistic way of life.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 34th Annual National Council for Black Studies. New
Orleans, LA,. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p429905_index.html.
Johnson, P. (1983). Faith stances, imagination, and campus ministry. In K. Stokes (Ed.), Faith
development in the adult life cycle (pp. 245-263). New York: William H. Sadler.
Johnson, T., Kristeller, J., and Sheets, V. (2004). Religiousness and spirituality in college students:
Separate dimensions with unique and common correlates. Journal of College Character, 2, 1-36.
Kessler, R. (1999). Nourishing students in secular schools. Educational Leadership, 56(4), 49-52.
Kinchloe, J. (2006). Critical ontology and Indigenous ways of being: Forging a postcolonial curriculum.
In Y. Kanu (Ed.), Curriculum as cultural practice: Postcolonial imaginations (pp 181-202).
University of Toronto Press: Toronto.
Kirkness, V. J. (1992). Giving voice to our ancestors. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 19, 145-
149.
Lattas, A. (1993). Essentialism, memory and resistance: Aboriginality and the politics of authenticity.
Oceania, 63(3), 2-67.
Longwood, M., Muesse, M., & Schipper, W. (2004). Men, spirituality, and the collegiate experience.
New Directions for Student Services, 107, 87-95.
Love, P. G. (2001). Spirituality and student development: Theoretical connections. New Directions for
Student Services, 95, 7-16.
Love, P. G., Bock, M., Jannarone, A., & Richardson, P. (2005). Identity interaction: Exploring the
spiritual experiences of lesbian and gay college students. Journal of College Student Development,
46(2), 193-209.
Macedo, D. (1999). Decolonizing indigenous knowledge (preface). In L. Semali and J. Kinchloe (Eds.),
What is indigenous knowledge?: Voices from the academy. New York: Falmer Press.
Mayuzumi, K. (2006). The tea ceremony as a decolonizing epistemology: Healing and Japanese
women. Journal of Transformative Education, 4(8), 8-26.
Mazama, M. A. (2002). Afrocentricity and African spirituality. Journal of Black Studies, 33(2), 218-
234.
McIsaac, E. (2000). Oral narratives as a site of resistance: Indigenous knowledge, colonialism, and
Western discourse. In G. Dei, B. Hall, & D. Rosenberg (Eds.), Indigenous knowledges in global
contexts (pp. 89-101). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
McNally, M. D. (2004). Indigenous pedagogy in the classroom: A service learning model for
discussion. American Indian Quarterly, 28(3&4), 604-617.
Nakagawa, Y. (2000). The structure of Eastern philosophy. Education for awakening: An Eastern
approach to holistic education (pp. 9-30). Brandon: Resource Center for Redesigning.
Oyewumi, O. (1997). Colonizing bodies and minds: Gender and colonialism. In The invention of
women: Making an African sense of Western gender discourses (pp. 121-156). Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Palmer, P. (2003). Teaching with heart and soul: Reflections on spirituality in teacher education.
Journal of Teacher Education, 54(5), 376-385.
Portman, T. and Garret, M. (2006). Native American healing traditions. International Journal of
Disability Development and Education, 53(4), 453-469.
Purcell, T.W. (1998). Indigenous knowledge and applied anthropology: Questions of definition and
direction. Human Organization, 57(3), 258-272.
Rendon, L. (2000). Academics of the heart: Reconnecting the scientific mind with the spirit’s artistry.
The Review of Higher Education, 24(1), 1-13.
Roberts, H. (1998). Indigenous knowledges and Western science: Perspectives from the Pacific. In D.
Hodson (Ed.), Science and technology education and ethnicity: An Aotearoa/New Zealand
perspective (p. 50). The Royal Society of New Zealand Miscellaneous Serious.
Robinson, P. (2004). Meditation: Its role in transformative learning and in the fostering of an integrative
vision for higher education. Journal of Transformative Education, 2(2), 107-119.
35
ERIC RITSKES
Rose, S. (2001). Is the term ‘spirituality’ a word that everyone uses, but nobody knows what anyone
means by it? Journal of Contemporary Religion, 16(2), 193-206.
Rushdie, S. (1992). Imaginary homelands: Essays and criticism 1981-1991. Harmondsworth:
Penguin/Granta.
Said, E. (1993). Culture and imperialism. New York: Vintage Books.
Schneiders, S. M. (2003). Religion vs. Spirituality: A contemporary conundrum. Spiritus, 3, 163-185.
Shahjahan, R. (2006). Spirituality in the academy: Reclaiming from the margins and evoking a
transformative way of knowing the world. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,
18(6), 1-23.
Simpson, L. R. (2004). Anticolonial strategies for the recovery and maintenance of indigenous
knowledge. American Indian Quarterly, 28(3), 373-384.
Smith, L. T. (1999). Colonizing knowledges. In L. T. Smith (Ed.), Decolonizing methodologies:
Research and Indigenous peoples (pp. 58-74). Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago Press.
Somé, M. (1994). Of water and the spirit: Ritual magic and imitation in the life of an African shaman.
New York: Penguin USA.
Tisdell, E. (2003). Breaking the silence: Defining spirituality in a culturally relevant educational setting.
Exploring spirituality and culture in adult and higher education (pp. 25-44). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Tisdell, E. & Tolliver, D. E. (2003). Claiming a sacred face: The role of spirituality and cultural identity
in transformative adult higher education. Journal of Transformative Education, 1(4), 368-392.
Wane, N. N. (2008). Mapping the field of Indigenous knowledges in anti-colonial discourse: A
transformative journey in education. Race Ethnicity and Education, 11(2), 183-197.
Wane, N. N. (2006). Is decolonization possible? In G. J. S. Dei & A. Kempf (Eds.), Anti-colonialism
and education: The politics of resistance (pp. 87-106). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Wane, N. N. (2005). African indigenous knowledge: Claiming, writing, storing, and sharing the
discourse. Journal of Thought, 40(2), 27-46.
Wangoola, P. (2000). Mpambo, the African multiversity: A philosophy to rekindle the African spirit. .
In G. Dei, B. Hall, & D. Rosenberg (Eds.), Indigenous knowledges in global contexts (pp. 265-277).
Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Ward, C. (1990). What they told Buchi Emecheta: Oral subjectivity and the joys of “Otherhood.” PMLA
105(1), 83-97.
Weedon, C. (1987). Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
York, M. (2001). New Age commodification and appropriation of spirituality. Journal of Contemporary
Religion, 16(3), 361-372.
36

Spirituality, Education & Society: An Integrated Approach

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Spirituality, Education & Society: An Integrated Approach

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Spirituality, Education & Society: An Integrated Approach

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

14,402 mm

Spirituality, Education & Society

Spirituality, Education & Society

Eric J. Ritskes (Eds.) Njoki N. Wane, Energy L. Manyimo

The editors have compiled a brilliant collection of essays. Each

B_SENSE006_48 DIVS Wane_PB.indd 1 30-05-11 12:26:07

Foreword by Ali A. Abdi

ISBN 978-94-6091-601-4 (paperback)

Published by: Sense Publishers,

Printed on acid-free paper

All rights reserved © 2011 Sense Publishers

Chapter 1: Situating Children in the Discourse of Spirituality

Chapter 2: Connected: Indigenous Spirituality as Resistance in the Classroom

Chapter 4: Spirituality and Its Relevance for the Contemplative Educator

Chapter 5: Spirituality: A Philosophy and a Research Tool

Chapter 6: The Role of Spirituality in Maori and Tibetan Village Schools

Chapter 7: Spirituality and Indigenous Knowledges: Study of Kototama and

Chapter 8: The Dialectics of Western Christianity and African Spirituality

Chapter 9: A Spiritual Journey in the Academy: My Personal Experience

Chapter 10: My Name is ‘Mohamed’, But Please Call Me ‘John’: Canadian

Chapter 11: Holding Relationships as Sacred Responsibilities: A Journey of

Chapter 12: Spirituality: An Interconnected Path to Healing

Chapter 13: Spirit Injury: The Impact of Colonialism on African Spirituality

Chapter 14: The Loss of My Indigenous Languages: As I Lose, I Struggle to

Chapter 15: Religious Fundamentalism, Political Power and the Colonization

Chapter 16: Wisdom Sharing and Altered Consciousness: A Transformative

Conclusion: Extending the Dialogue

Notes on the Contributors .................................................................................... 239

Subject Index........................................................................................................ 243

To all of you: Asante sana.

In Spirituality, Education & Society: An Integrated Approach, Njoki Wane, Energy

bell hooks concludes her argument on spirituality in education by stating: “I can

tools or spirituality as a discourse or a methodology? Our suggestion is that one

socialize children’s spiritual identity, choosing to value quantifiable elements of

practices involves holding these relationships as sacred. Holding relationships as

1. SITUATING CHILDREN IN THE DISCOURSE

How is it possible that I have an undergraduate degree in Child Development and

N. Wane et al. (eds.), Spirituality, Education & Society, 1–14.

begins with knowledge building. Our understanding and teaching of child

In this chapter I will be exploring children’s spirituality through a developmental

to create a psychology of possibility. Born in Tennessee in 1950 to parents who

In this chapter I will incorporate both my knowledge of child development from

The definition and interpretation of spirituality is largely dependent upon one’s

spiritual development (Myers, 1997). To ensure that spiritual pursuits do not

CHILDREN’S SPIRITUAL WAYS OF KNOWING

To ensure the recognition and nurturing of children’s spirituality it is necessary to

on it (Gopnik, 2009). Personal knowledge, based on feelings, is developed as

Albert Marshall. He proposes a blending of our ways of knowing into a new

The current Western education system is not formally addressing spirituality.

authentically and spontaneously in relation to the world – not to impose a

The education system itself needs to engage in transformative learning. It needs to

I conclude this chapter with an excerpt from a children’s novel by Margery

Challenging my cultural conditioning has expanded my understanding of children’s

2. CONNECTED: INDIGENOUS SPIRITUALITY AS

N. Wane et al. (eds.), Spirituality, Education & Society, 15–36.

indigenous knowledges are posited in direct opposition to Western knowledge. As

Defining Spirituality through Individualism

Defining Spirituality through Connectedness

connected, that each individual is connected to others in their communities,