Embracing Complexity: A Three-Realm Approach to Engage Contemporary Political Landscapes

During the 1960s, student protests at universities in the United States, particularly protests by students of color, made visible the challenges to public institutions that reproduced interlocking systems of white supremacy, misogyny, transphobia, and capitalism (Kynard; Ruiz). More recently, complex global political tensions have grown in occupied ancestral land in the Middle East, where students have similarly protested public institutions. Taking these strategies to heart, university students across the United States have challenged public and private institutions about their institutions’ investments in global conflict and genocide. Here, we simultaneously acknowledge the histories of student protest, the increasing complexity of global and national political contexts, and the challenges of teaching and campus work within such charged ecologies.

We come to this piece as both writing and rhetoric scholar-practitioners (who study equity- and justice-focused approaches to teaching and administration) and leaders in teaching and learning centers (who lead equity-based pedagogy workshops for university educators). The challenges of the moment call for us to resist binary thinking and embrace complexity—the shifting, interactive, and dynamic nature of human interactions with and in social and political systems. Complexity, writes adrienne maree brown, “creat[es] an abundance of connections, desires, interactions, and reactions” (51). Drawing on our own experience, we offer strategies to support postsecondary educators thoughtfully engage and perform reflective work in contemporary cultural and political landscapes. We offer, too, a framework for self-reflection that educators can use to interrogate the complexities of working, teaching, learning, and leading in this cultural and political moment.

In offering the strategies and framework, we describe three key approaches to guide intentional reflection among postsecondary educators. We argue that society (the large scale) and the classroom (the small scale) are linked, and that humanities teachers can continue to be at the forefront of adaptation to the large scale within their classrooms, where they can help students embrace those same complexities. Interacting with the three approaches offered here can support educators work toward braver discourses surrounding the political and cultural landscape. Furthermore, we suggest that participating in reflection and accompanying action engages learners in and beyond the classroom and serves as a tool for changing the systems.

Recognizing Positionalities and Ecosystems

An intersectional feminist approach considers the ways that society has interlocking systems of oppression. For instance, Kimberlé Crenshaw discusses how intersectionality helps to “account for multiple grounds of identity when considering how the social world is constructed” (1245).  As Amanda Hawks and Bethany Meadows synthesize at length in their article, systems of oppression create our institutions, including education (refer to, e.g., Kendall). Those harmed in these systems are especially those whose identities do not fit the systems’ “mythical norm” (Lorde). Everyone has various positionalities (e.g., race, nationality, language use, gender, sexuality, religion, class) that cannot be separated at the individual level—thus, the large scale is linked to the small scale. This “account[ing] for” involves the various ecosystems of connection in our modern world, and everyone’s identities and positionalities shape how they engage and interact with the systems, institutions, and ecosystems.

To model this type of positionality reflection, we share how our positionalities inform our work in these areas. Bethany offers these insights from their positionalities as a white, middle-class, disabled, educated, queer femme nonbinary person. She acknowledges that she has a lifetime of (un)learning to do and that we are messy people who are trying our best in an even messier world. Nick’s positionality as a white, cisgender queer man informs his professional work, which examines how institutions change through large-scale (un)learning initiatives. Like Bethany, he recognizes that (un)learning and action are nonlinear, dynamic, and complicated.

Taken differently, interrogating positionalities means placing ourselves—who we are, what we know, what we value—in relation to complex ecosystems disciplinarily, locally, and globally. Positionalities help name what we pay attention to and why (refer to, e.g., Ahmed).

By interrogating this kind of positioning, university educators disrupt singular, binary perspectives they may encounter in everyday university work. As an extended example, we provide a short teaching interlude to demonstrate how reflecting on positionality can serve as a critical tool for engaging contemporary political and cultural landscapes.

The Scenario

Mark is a graduate student who is studying American literature and teaching in the university’s first-year writing program. Halfway through the semester, Mark notices several of his first-year students characterizing opposing arguments in a research paper with intense generalizations about right and wrong. These same descriptions start to dominate group discussion in his seminar circles. Since he is frustrated, Mark seeks out a mentor, another graduate student in the program. Over coffee with his mentor, Mark realizes that his identities—white, masculine-presenting—inadvertently influence how his students approach writing research papers. In telling students how he values diverse voices and social-justice approaches, Mark has unwittingly suggested that there is a “right side” and a “wrong side” to issues that are seldom so straightforward. Mark takes action by creating a lesson in which students are asked to consider how their own identities and positionalities manifest in their social media in ways they may or may not have been mindful of.

When Mark interrogated his inherited values and identities, and how his values and identities connect to the larger world, he was able to design an intentional and responsive lesson for his writing class that directly asked students to model reflection at the small-scale level. We offer questions below that invite postsecondary educators to practice positional reflection as a cornerstone strategy for teaching against a backdrop of dynamic social and political contexts.

Questions for Educators to Consider

• What are my identities and positionalities? Which identities do I think about most? least? How have my positionalities shaped my lived experiences and knowledge about the world?
• How do my identities and positionalities shape my teaching values and practices? Do any of my values and practices reinforce or subvert dominant ideologies? What are the implications of these reinforcements and subversions?
• How does my educational institution reinforce certain values based on the institution’s history and positionalities? How does my institution interface with other institutions and systems? How does my institution’s ecosystem affect the current complexities in the world?

Resources for Further Inquiry

• Jones, Natasha, et al. “Disrupting the Past to Disrupt the Future: An Antenarrative of Technical Communication.” Technical Communication Quarterly, vol. 25, no. 4, 2016, pp. 211–29.
• Pouncil, Floyd, and Nick Sanders. “The Work Before: A Model for Coalitional Alliance toward Black Futures in Technical Communication.” Technical Communication Quarterly, vol. 31, no. 3, 2022, pp. 283–97.
• Reagan, Bernice. “Coalitional Politics: Turning the Century.” Home Girls: A Black Feminist Anthology, edited by Barbara Smith, Kitchen Table: Women of Color Press, 1983, pp. 356–68.
• Sanders, Nick, et al. “Making Good on Our Promises to Language Justice: Spheres of Coalitional Possibilities across the Discipline.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 75, no. 2, 2023, pp. 360–88.

Interrogating the Reproduction of Worldviews

Our identities and participations shape what we know and how we move through the world. As writing studies scholars, we position the acts associated with worldviews and ideologies as literacies—the discursive and embodied ways that humans know, and in which they act, based on their lived experiences.

In fact, critical literacy scholars have showcased that our ways of being and our ways of knowing are inextricably coupled. For example, writing studies scholars have long considered literacy to encompass social practices; that is, literacy refers not only to reading and writing but also to robust combinations of being and doing. Eric Darnell Pritchard explains that literacy is a way of “reading everyday life” (20). At the same time, literacy practices are never taught in neutral circumstances. Deborah Brandt’s work on sponsors of literacy shows that literacy is taught within specific political and capital markets and is sponsored for some kind of labor and ideological return. Literate action, then, carries and re-creates worldviews, which reproduces social structures through individual action.

Because actions are constituted with worldviews and ideologies (the large scale), it’s imperative that postsecondary educators interrogate the deeper commitments for their actions. As an extended example, Asao Inoue showcases how the acts of judging are fashioned through deeper epistemological commitments and dispositions. As he writes, white racial dispositions

appeal to fairness through objectivity. . . . They are set up as apolitical [and] deny difference by focusing on the individual or making larger claims to abstract liberal principles, such as the principle of meritocracy. These structures create dispositions that form reading and judging practices, dispositions for values and expectations for writing and behavior. (48)

By interrogating these values, educators can embrace plurality and complexity in their day-to-day work (the small scale), disrupting large-scale machinations. In other words, by changing how we act, we can also change our deeper philosophical commitments.

The Scenario

Right after he completed graduate school, Nick directed a center of teaching excellence at a regional comprehensive Hispanic-serving institution in southern Colorado. While participating on a panel on disability justice, Nick found that several staff members were frustrated about being asked to provide additional supports for students inside and outside the classroom. The staff members believed the provision of additional support would not “fairly” prepare students for the real world. One of the panelists used the opportunity to ask the staff members about practices that would make their jobs easier, and to ask if making something easier is the same as making something unfair. The exchange initiated a productive conversation about how supports can be scaled to different offices and processes.

When we interrogate practices or dispositions that are often taken for granted—by talking about how, at the small scale, they are associated with worldviews at the large scale—we can better understand how certain groups of people may be impacted both by ideas and by the acts associated with those ideas. In this example, the panelists reframed the conversation toward who is impacted and the worldviews embedded in often invisible practices. In this spirit, we offer guiding reflective questions for interrupting and interrogating the reproduction of worldviews.

Questions for Educators to Consider

• How did I come to adopt the worldviews I believe? What experiences, identities, or influences shaped those views?
• What values have I inherited from my discipline, the institutions where I have worked, and my life experiences? Do my values reinforce or disrupt the status quo within the dominant systems of oppression?
• What other viewpoints may be in conversation or competition with my worldviews? Can other viewpoints bring nuance to what I believe?
• How do taken-for-granted ideas and actions impact different groups? How might shifting worldviews impact different populations?
• Which of my beliefs do I prioritize? Do my priorities create exclusions? Do my priorities create a binary view of a topic?

Resources for Further Inquiry

• Bazerman, Charles. A Theory of Literate Action: Literate Action Volume Two. Parlor Press / WAC Clearinghouse, 2013.
• Brandt, Deborah. Literacy in American Lives. Cambridge UP, 2001.
• Inoue, Asao B. Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies: Teaching and Assessing Writing for a Socially Just Future. Parlor Press / WAC Clearinghouse, 2015.
• Pritchard, Eric Darnell. Fashioning Lives: Black Queers and the Politics of Literacy. Southern Illinois UP, 2016.

Teaching to Embrace Complexity

The world is multifaceted and complex, but, as Audre Lorde declares, “Much of Western European history conditions us to see human difference in simplistic opposition to each other: dominant/subordinate, good/bad, up/down, superior/inferior.” Similarly, many K–12 curriculums in the United States still center dominant, binary narratives in their stories about the world and its people. Even when nondominant stories are included, they enter with tokenization or surface-level integrations to the dominant narrative. Thus, a binary of narrative and thinking has been integrated into ways of conceptualizing the world from the start of educational socialization in the United States at the large scale.

Yet, we can trust that our students will bring complexity if we give them the opportunity. Lane Glisson writes, “Although our students may lack formal training to assess information, they are no strangers to complexity—situations that have many parts and that are not easy to comprehend. They live in a world of inequality and difficult choices” (464).

The Scenario

Bethany’s course Writing Center Theory and Practice in fall 2022 began with Bethany grounding the content in intersectionality for the students, setting community norms for engagement, and previewing the content that would require (un)learning throughout the semester. A few weeks into the course, students were asked to grapple with the legacy of exclusion in the history of writing centers and how that exclusion manifests itself today through educational practices like linguistic racism. The students were ready to tackle the complexity because, in addition to the grounding and framework early in the course, throughout their educational experiences they had been told myths about writing—again and again—that created layered harm for them (and for others in education).

The students came from a place of strength and assets by bringing in myriad lived experiences and identities. Students did not need to avoid the hard and complex situations; instead they were able to collectively discuss, unpack, and strategize how to make their everyday practices better despite the complexities.

Below are some questions for reflection that may help postsecondary educators consider how complexities enter the classroom.

Questions for Educators to Consider

• If I don’t say anything about the current complexities in this world, why don’t I? Is it because I feel uncomfortable? Is it for institutional or societal reasons (e.g., maintaining a visa)?
• Does talking about the complexities of this world necessitate discussion about divisive political topics? Why or why not?
• How can I acknowledge tragic events for students without bringing the events into debate? How can I provide resources for students? How can I be flexible for those experiencing trauma and retraumatization?
• If I choose to bring divisive political topics into my classroom, why do I do so? How can I center a classroom of dialogue rather than a classroom of debate?
• Have I set community norms and guidelines for my course collaboratively with students? Do these community guidelines emphasize listening to understand rather than listening to respond, as well as the paradox of intolerance? How can I keep students in a place where they can learn instead of shutting down in defensiveness or hurt?

Resources for Further Inquiry

• Davidson, Shannon. Trauma-Informed Practices for Postsecondary Education: A Guide. Education Northwest, Aug. 2017, educationnorthwest.org/sites/default/files/resources/trauma-informed-practices-postsecondary-508.pdf.
• Glisson, Lane. “Breaking the Spin Cycle: Teaching Complexity in the Age of Fake News.” Portal: Libraries and the Academy, vol. 19, no. 3, 2019, pp. 461–84. Project Muse, https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2019.0027.
• hooks, bell. Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. Routledge, 1994.
• Love, Bettina L. We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom. Beacon, 2020.
• McIntyre, Lee. Post-truth. MIT Press, 2018.
• Muhammad, Gholdy. Cultivating Genius: An Equity Framework for Culturally and Historically Responsive Literacy. Scholastic, 2020.

Looking Forward

We will begin to make change by incorporating the three approaches: recognizing positionalities and ecosystems, interrogating the reproduction of worldviews, and teaching to embrace complexity. This article is not a how-to instructional manual; the approaches herein are deeply dependent on the contexts, places, and positionalities an educator occupies. That said, by self-reflecting and listening to understand rather than listening to respond, we make change, even if it seems small, because the large scale and small scale are always linked. As brown declares:

How we are at the small scale is how we are at the large scale. The patterns of the universe repeat at scale. There is a structural echo that suggests two things: one, that there are shapes and patterns fundamental to our universe, and two, that what we practice at a small scale can reverberate to the largest scale. (25)

We ask educators to work on transforming their small scale and letting the reverberations echo for large-scale change.

Works Cited

Ahmed, Sara. Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others. Duke UP, 2006.

Brandt, Deborah. Literacy in American Lives. Cambridge UP, 2001.

brown, adrienne maree. Emergent Strategy: Shaping Change, Changing Worlds. AK Press, 2017.

Crenshaw, Kimberlé. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review, vol. 43, no. 6, 1991, pp. 1241–99, https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039.

Glisson, Lane. “Breaking the Spin Cycle: Teaching Complexity in the Age of Fake News.” Portal: Libraries and the Academy, vol. 19, no. 3, 2019, pp. 461–84. Project Muse, https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2019.0027.

Hawks, Amanda, and Bethany Meadows. “We Don’t Need More ‘Safe’ Spaces; We Need Transformative Justice.” Peitho, vol. 26, no. 1, fall 2023, cfshrc.org/article/we-dont-need-more-safe-spaces-we-need-transformative-justice/.

Inoue, Asao B. Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies: Teaching and Assessing Writing for a Socially Just Future. Parlor Press / WAC Clearinghouse, 2015.

Kendall, Mikki. Hood Feminism: Notes from the Women That a Movement Forgot. Viking, 2020.

Kynard, Carmen. Vernacular Insurrections: Race, Black Protest, and the New Century in Composition-Literacies Studies. State U of New York P, 2013.

Lorde, Audre. “Age, Race, Class and Sex: Women Redefining Difference.” Copeland Colloquium, Amherst College, Apr. 1980. Presentation.

Pritchard, Eric Darnell. Fashioning Lives: Black Queers and the Politics of Literacy. Southern Illinois UP, 2016.

Ruiz, Iris D. Reclaiming Composition for Chicano/as and Other Ethnic Minorities. Palgrave Macmillan, 2016.