Abstract

In the context of historically marginalized communities, defamiliarizing analytic tools borrowed from literary and critical theory, when employed to re-examine and reassess, even seemingly benign or progressive instructional efforts, peel back familiar dominant appearances and expose previously silenced and potentially disturbing accounts of the oppressive conditions in the education system. The Bodos, an indigenous group in India have borne the brunt of colonization, repression and subjugation ever since the 1826 Treaty of Yandaboo. Large percentages of failures in the board examinations, school drop outs etc. bring to the fore questions such as – What are the aspects in the existing education system that alienate rather than enthuse the Bodo? Why is it that even the most well intentioned teachers and administrators unwittingly become complicit in the operation and perpetuation of oppressive hegemonic dynamics communicated through education? Through application of defamiliarizing methods to the elementary education program in vogue in Bodo medium schools, the article reveals underlying erasures and insidiously masked, inbuilt hegemony that mar, undermine and oppress the Bodo. The findings show plenty texts and sub-texts in the existing Bodo medium elementary education system that reproduces oppression thus alienating the learner.

Introduction

Swdwmshri is the sole teacher in a Bodo Medium Elementary School (BMES). The school is about a kilometer from her house and she walks to school daily. As the ninety odd children see her approaching from a distance, they run and scramble into the one-room school building. As she enters they salute her, religiously sing “O Mor Aponar Desh,” salute her once again and take their places. Swdwmshri then gets busy assigning some with activities and teaching others. She accomplishes this dexterously in one classroom all through the day. This is carried on throughout the academic year.

At first glance there appears nothing wrong with this everyday occurrence. People in the village are attuned to this phenomenon and carry on with their lives aware of the situation. After thirty years of establishment of the school in the village, they are also aware that the village has never produced a graduate. They have also internalized that children in the village can never do well in school. They state the following as reasons for the same, children arenot studious enough, naughty, deviant, lack the interest and zeal to study, teachers do not teach them well enough etc.

In the context of historically marginalized communities, when defamiliarizing analytic tools borrowed from literary and critical theory, are employed to re-examine and reassess, even seemingly benign or progressive instructional efforts, they peel off familiar dominant appearances and expose previously silenced and potentially disturbing accounts of the oppressive conditions in the education system (Kaomea 2003). The Bodos, a tribal group in India have borne the brunt of colonization, repression and subjugation ever since the Treaty of Yandaboo, 1826. In the present times, too, large percentages of failures in the board examinations (Choudhury, 2007), school dropouts etc. bring to the fore questions such as, what are the aspects in the existing education system that alienate rather than enthuse the Bodo? Why is it that even the most well intentioned teachers and administrators unwittingly become complicit in the operation and perpetuation of oppressive and hegemonic dynamics that are transmitted in everyday classroom experiences?

Kaomea (2003), in adopting a defamiliarizing inquiry into the Hawaiian Studies’ KupunaProgram called for anti-oppressive and decolonizing research methodologies that look beyond familiar and dominant narratives, in order to give voice to the previously marginalized or voiceless. A variety of defamiliarizing techniques drawn from literary and critical theory, in concert with Native Hawaiian cultural traditions, were drawn to force readers into dramatic awareness of previously silenced perspectives on the lesser known aspects of even the highly praised curriculum.

Through the application of defamiliarizing methods, we seek to reveal the underlying erasures and insidiously masked inbuilt hegemony that mar, undermine and oppress the Bodo. This has been done taking the example of the elementary education program in vogue in Bodo medium schools. Through a careful analysis of the silence, absence, and erasures within texts and sub-texts of the Bodo medium elementary education system, the present defamiliarizing study reveals various ways in which oppression is perpetrated, thus alienating learners.

Taking cue from the defamiliarizing methods used by Kaomea (2003) and Shklovsky (1965) a content analysis of Bodo medium elementary education textbooks under the Sarva Siksha Abhiyan was carried out; students were simulated into discussions on two aspects – personalities they consider heros (national, cultural, etc.) and songs and festivals in their community which they consider most important. Discussions were held with primary school teachers about their everyday classroom experiences around the research topic. Community leaders were interviewed for the purpose of understanding what they felt were critical factors that continued oppressive and hegemonic knowledge transmissions in the classroom and what they consider the way forward to move beyond the evident oppressor-oppressed relationship.

What is oppression?

Oppression is the domination (political, economic, social and cultural) of subordinate groups in society by powerful groups (Mullaly, 1993). Domination is “the ability for one social group to systematically control, manipulate and use other people for its own ends (Goodman, 2001).

Freire (1970) points out the centrality of group membership in discussing oppression and domination. If an individual is oppressed, it is by virtue of being a member of a group or category of people that is systematically reduced, molded and immobilized, that is, to recognize a person as oppressed, one has to see that individual as belonging to a group of a certain sort. Powell (2001) invokes Fraser (1997) to demonstrate that “cultural domination,” “non-recognition,” and cultural “disrespect” grounded in social patterns of representation, interpretation and communication are veritable ways in which cultural and symbolic injustice are perpetrated in oppressor-oppressed relationship.

Freire (1970) posits that legitimization of oppression occurs through ideological hegemony of the oppressor by systematically controlling the social institutions, namely, the law, the army, the political system, the economic system, the welfare institutions, education and the media. Thus, knowledge, ideas and values of the oppressed get manipulated and distorted, and people often internalise their own oppression and blame themselves for the difficult situations and problems that they find themselves in. Oppressed persons are led to believe that they are not oppressed or that there are good reasons their oppression which leads to fatalism, horizontal violence, self-depreciation and inferiorisation.

Oppressed: The Bodos

The process of revitalization of the Bodo and the consequent Bodoland Movement has been variedly described. Roy (1995) in trying to present the Bodoland Movement has termed it as an “imbroglio”, Prabhakar (2003) has categorised the Bodo areas as “territories of fear”, different mainstream media houses have been steadfast labeling the Bodoland Movement as “a law and order situation,” “unscrupulous,” “unfortunate,” “disastrous” so on and so forth. These narratives in their attempt to describe the reconstruction of ethnicity of the hitherto colonized race have been conspicuous in refraining from inducing the positive aspects that could be drawn from a tribal people’s movement. As Kaomea (2003) posits, such attempts stop short from telling the whole truth and suffer the proclivities of a single-sided story. Since they tell only the partial truth, it could be said that they have at best contributed towards maligning and sabotaging a move towards liberation of the oppressed. At the same time, these expressions which generally stem from the etic perspectives, have contributed to construction and continuation of an inferior and negative image of the tribal people in question.

However, taking cue from tribal peoples’ movements from around the globe one may stand in agreement that identity political formations typically aimed at securing the political freedom of a specific constituency marginalized within its larger context are assertions for reclaiming ways of understanding their distinctiveness that challenge dominant oppressive characterizations, with the goal of greater self determination (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, n.d.). Besides, the move towards revitalizing cultural traditions and language has been found to be immensely significant in initiating a healing process for many tribal peoples and it is one way to resist the deeply entrenched assumptions about their inferiority and subordination (St. Denis, 2007) and thereby their discrimination and exclusion.

It was in this connection that the General Assembly of the United Nations in its 107th plenary meeting held on the 13 September 2007 proclaimed the Declaration of the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) which affirmed that all doctrines, policies and practices based on or advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and socially unjust. The same Declaration also welcomed the fact that tribal peoples are organizing themselves for political, economic, social and cultural enhancement and in order to bring to an end all forms of discrimination and oppression wherever they occur. It recognizes, in particular, the right of tribal families and communities to retain shared responsibility for the upbringing, training, education and well-being of their children (UN, 2007).

UN DRIP acknowledges, too, that tribal peoples have suffered from historic injustices as a result of, inter alia, their colonization and dispossession of their lands, territories and resources, thus preventing them from exercising, in particular, their right to development in accordance with their own needs and interests. It called for recognizing the urgent need to respect and promote the inherent rights of tribal peoples which derive from their political, economic and social structures and from their cultures, spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies, especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources.

In the Indian context, one may reiterate that justice, equality, liberty and fraternity being important benchmarks of the preamble to the Constitution of India, it lays down several provisions for the welfare, protection, development and empowerment of the tribal peoples of India. Articles 15, 16, 17 and 23 empower the state to make special provisions for the Scheduled Tribes and other weaker sections pertaining to socio-economic development of the tribes. Article 29 (1) makes preservation of distinct languages a right. Article 30 promises right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions. Article 35 (a) provides for instruction in mother tongue at primary stages of education. Article 46 directs the state to promote educational and economic interests of the Scheduled Tribes and other weaker sections.

The Bodoland Movement

Bodo, also appearing as Kachari in usage, is a generic term for a number of groups speaking a more or less common dialect or language or claiming a common ancestry in India. Gait (1905), Hazarika (1994) and Baruah (2003) regard the Bodos as the aborigines, or earliest known inhabitants of Brahmaputra valley, that is, the whole of modern Assam, North Bengal and parts of Bangladesh. Though spread in different parts of this region, as well as, in the neighbouring countries, majority of their population is found in Central Assam. The Bodo people form the largest indigenous group in the present demography of the region. Linguistically the Garo, the Dimasa, the Hajong, the Sonowal, the Deori, the Rabha, the Tiwa and the Borok of Twipra (Tripura), and many other cognate tribes are part of this great Bodo race.

Although it is far beyond the scope of this article to detail the historical foundations of the Bodo Movement for self-determination, a few points are worth highlighting.

Bodo Culture and language as voice of collective ethnic identity

The Bodo people identify themselves as Bodo through common culture. This culture gives Bodos an ethnic identity and a ‘we’ feeling. Bodo identity and culture have been the two basic building blocks of their resurgent ethnicity. Through the regenerative construction of Bodo identity and culture, the Bodo people have attempted to address the problems of ethnic boundaries and meanings. Embedded in Bodo culture is language, religion, customary laws, rituals, symbols and dress that makes Bodos a distinct ethnic community.

Bodos represent to the world by way of self-representation by speaking their language, wearing their dress dokhna and gamcha, practice of rituals and maintenance of traditional institutions like Gouthum (the traditional village council), and celebration of Bwisagu, Than Bawnai, Kherai Mwsanai and Ungkham Gwlwi Bawnai. These traditional celebrations stand as resistance towards Hinduization or Christianization (Xaxa, 2005). Even though religious converts do not participate in such celebrations, they are organized and celebrated at different times in a year.

The typical way the village is constructed, daily activities, leisure time spent collectively, the revolt of imposition of foreign language and rule, daily events of Bodoland struggle, formation of organizations, ceasefire, Bodo Accord, Bodoland Territorial Council, and prevailing uncertainties are all kept alive in folksongs, tales and ballads. Thus, Xaxa (2003) accords to language the status of an “umbilical cord in sustaining the positive and living resource of tribal identity”. This is the reason why Bodos were against the Official Language Act of 1960 and the imposition of Assamese language in schools.

In spite of repressive measures and assaults by state machinery on the very roots of Bodo communitarian ways of life, the All Bodo Students Union (ABSU) with Bodo Thunlai Afat fought for recognition of Bodo language and stood fast in their demand for Roman Script for Bodo language. Assamese leaders and the Center however, yet again imposed Devanagri as the script for the Bodo language; such was the hatred of Assamese that they were ready to accept anything except Assamese. The acceptance of devanagri was a mistake; Bodos were to learn Bodo through Hindi script, a painful process, this, their leaders now feel, was a mistake (Hazarika, 1994).

In order to counter the hegemony of Assamese nationalism, which was slowly putting Bodo language, culture and ethnicity in a precarious situation, the Boro Thunlai Afat was formed in 1952. It adopted a resolution in the following tune:

It cannot be denied that the Assam is a multi-lingual state. Every linguistic group desires to keep alive their literature and get education in their own mother tongue. The biggest linguistic group in the state is the Assamese which can claim only 54%. According to the opinion of the States’ Reorganization Committee (SRC), a language should be spoken by seventy per cent or more to be recognised as an official language of a state. Looked at from this point of view the declaration of Assamese as the Official language of Assam will mean imposition on the people of other linguistic groups.

Hazarika, (1994) affirms that Bodo resentment over the years was the result of the “supercilious and arrogant” attitude of the Assamese towards tribal groups of the state and the imposition of Assamese on them. Thus, we find that ABSU, formally launched in 1967, was not into politics initially, but twenty years later it started a coordinated movement to restore Bodos their rights and privileges as a distinct community. Our respondents opined that Bodos started asserting their rights way back in 1928 to the then visiting Simon Commission but became aggressive about their demand for a separate state when the Assam Gana Parishad (AGP) government failed to do anything for the Bodos, despite the fact that Bodos showed full support to the anti-alien agitation of the Bangladeshis. In 1987, The ABSU submitted a memorandum to the President of India which stated:

Assam is a multilingual, multi-racial and a multi-cultural state. But yet the Assamese people always try to impose Assamese language upon the non-Assamese people including the indigenous tribal people. As such, here arises a clash between the Assamese speaking people on one hand and the tribals and other linguistic minorities on the other.

State Repression: The Strategy of Assamese Nationalism

The shared experience of ethnic minorities and linguistic minorities within the state of Assam propelled the disintegration of the state into different states at different points of time. Thus we have the states of Nagaland, Meghalaya and Mizoram, who, one after another dissociated from the rule of the Assam Government. One may be left wondering as to why or what is it that has propelled the tribes and the ethnic communities to move away? Different causes and explanations may be put forth for the same, namely, differences in ethnicity, culture, language, customs, traditions and aspirations. However, on careful analysis, one may figure it that these differences alone were insufficient to initiate the fissiparous process.

A better explanation in this regard may be to say that there existed a pragmatic notion of ‘incompatibility’ between these communities and their respective cultures and aspirations. The ‘incompatibility’ here, did arise and may be attributed to the aggressive assertion of Assamese nationalism. The situation became uglier still when this Assamese nationalism used state machinery to propagate and promote its propaganda of Assamisation of the tribals.

This trend began right after Indian Independence. Whether the government was run by the Congress, the United Front or the AGP, the policy of aggrandizement of Assamese identity was pursued in all spheres. In relation to the Bodo issue, it is important to cite the ABSU memorandum to the President of India:

The intention is very clear. The Assamese people and the Assam Government want to Assamise and assimilate the non-Assamese through the imposition of Assamese language and culture……Just after assuming power, the AGP government imposed Assamese language as compulsory third language upon the non-Assamese medium students in secondary Schools through a Circular given by the secondary Board of Education of Assam (SEBA) on the 28th of January, 1986.

Thus, the state government of Assam always in the hands of the Assamese, adopted a repressive and oppressive stance towards other groups, especially the tribes.

The Bodoland Settlement

On February 10 th 2003, the Assam Government, the Union Government and the Bodo Liberation Tigers signed the Memorandum of Settlement on Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) in New Delhi. The BTC has been given legislative powers over 40 Subjects. The accord provided for an Executive Council Comprising of 12 executive members, including a Chief and a Deputy Chief. The Bodoland Territorial Council is an Autonomous self governing body within the State of Assam that provides constitutional protection under the Sixth Schedule. The Bodoland Territorial Area Districts (BTAD) comprised of four districts viz. Kokrajhar, Chirang, Baksha and Udalguri; curved out of Kokrajhar, Bongaigoan, Barpeta, Nalbari, Kamrup, Sonitpur districts of Assam.

Besides the provisions for limited self governance, the Bodo language has been accorded a place in the Eight Schedule of the Indian Constitution. It ensures for Bodo language the Constitutional recognition as a language of national importance. However, despite meeting these longstanding demands, much is desired in the arena of education of Bodo children – oppressive elements remain in the scholastic processes every day.

Making the Familiar Uncomfortable

Literature on students hailing from Bodo populations show that they consistently and persistently perform lower than their peers, according to traditional measures of school achievement, because their culture at home is at odds with the culture and expectations of schools.

One of the most general but direct explanations of tribal students failing to progress is alluded to culturally non- responsive schooling. As it does not ‘make sense’ to students who are not members of, or assimilated into, the dominant social group (Klug & Whitfield, 2003). One may note here that a culturally responsive education model in contrast to the present education system has also been described as that which ‘builds a bridge’ between a child’s home culture and the school to effect improved learning and school achievement (Pewewardy & Hammer, 2003). Related but still more specific, Klump and McNeir (2005) draw on the multicultural education literature to note that culturally responsive education recognizes, respects, and uses students’ identities and backgrounds as meaningful sources for creating optimal learning environments. Being culturally responsive is more than being respectful, empathetic or sensitive. Accompanying actions, such as having high expectations for students and ensuring that these expectations are realized, are what make a difference (Gay, 2000).

Castagno and Brayboy (2007) having extensively reviewed the existing literature on culturally responsive schooling reiterate that three concepts appear to be of utmost importance when considering the schooling of Indigenous youth: self-determination and tribal sovereignty, racism, and Indigenous epistemologies. Wisher and Tippeconnic (1999) note that negative stereotypes coupled with inadequate and inaccurate information about the tribal peoples in school curricula, damage the self-concepts and subsequent behavior of the youths. A movement out of this vicious cycle is possible only by making the familiar uncomfortable (Kaomea, 2003).

It is in this context that we ventured into examining the accuracy, inclusivity, bias, stereotyping and omissions that exist in the textbooks of elementary schools. We have used the Manitoba Indian Brotherhood’s framework to identify silences, absences, and erasures found in our elementary school curricular material.

Oppression by Omission, Inertia and Obliteration

There exists a dichotomy in the concept of ‘Hero’ among the students. Discussions relating to the theme evoked spirited and enthusiastic responses – Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru and Bhagat Singh and Rani of Jhansi emerged as the most prominent, followed by Lakhsminath Bezbaruah, Kanaklata Baruah and Maniram Dewan. It was good and fairly impressive that the students in such an interior village could tell us about the national heroes of India and Assam. Tremendous amount of hard work and dedication on the part of the teacher (being the lone teacher of the school) went into shaping the knowledge base of the students. It is quite an accomplishment considering the fact that the school has never seen electricity or known sophisticated teaching – learning equipments, characteristic of classrooms in present times. There appeared to be nothing wrong or ‘out of the place’ in the discussion.

However, when defamiliarizing tools are deployed to analyze the same, it becomes evident that students in their eagerness to glorify national heroes forgot about their own heroes – heroes who walked their villages were epitomes of courage and sacrifice, they had accomplished deeds of bravery and are very much part of everyday stories. Songs about them are sung in the village, community sports are organized and festivals celebrated in commemoration of their greatness. However, within the confines of the school, they cease to exist. What would be the consequences of such reproductions, of a generation bereft of their history and a skewed selfhood is not too difficult to gauge. However, we need mention that the curricular of the school reflects credit on only a particular group, frequently the dominant group. A bias exists because of a failure to keep abreast historical scholarship that leads to perpetuation of legends and half-truths and worse still, bias by obliteration, which is, ignoring significant aspects of Bodo history.

Oppression by Defamation, Disparagement and Cumulative Implication

Because the school curriculum told a one-sided story and refrained from telling the whole truth about heroism, deeds of valour and patriotism – a distorted notion of the nature of the Bodo people is presented to the child. In textbooks, heroism and deeds of valour are characteristics of great heroes like Mahatma Gandhi, Bhagat Singh and Rani of Jhansi, and are not characteristics of the Bodos. For them heroes like Birgwshri, Sikhna Jwhwlaw and Tengfakhri are no longer familiar. Here is an instance of denying or belittling the contribution of the Bodo people to the mainstream culture. When it is done on a day-to-day basis in the classroom, it reinforces stereotypical notions – transmitting the impression that only one group is responsible for positive development in society.

Oppression by (lack of) Concreteness and (lack of) Comprehensiveness and Balance

To be concrete, the curricular must be factual, objective, and realistic. The learner should be able to ‘make sense’ of the material. As the students were spirited in discussing national heroes, they displayed similar enthusiasm in singing the national anthem and O mor aponar desh which are beautifully printed on the last pages of the bithorai text book. However, the meanings of the songs were missing: neither the teacher nor the students could explain what they meant. The National anthem is in Sanskritised Hindi, while O mor aponar desh the Assamese State Anthem is in Assamesee. Here, it could be said that the curricular fails to mention all relevant facts that will help form the opinion of the students.

While discussing national heroes and their fight to overthrow, slay and expel the British from Indian soil, we have ample evidence of just use of anger and dissent. Indian anger against British repression and oppression ie legitimized. However, there is no scope for dissent and anger among the Bodos. Thus, there is a co-creation and reproduction of a docile, inferior and subordinate category of the self in the psyche of the learner.

Towards Freedom from Oppression – Culturally Responsive Schooling

For our understanding of existing literature pertaining to the liberation of the oppressed, we draw from critical formulations of the conflict perspective. A critical theory of society is defined as a theory having practical intent. It is committed to change the world ‘in ways that can help ‘emancipate’ those in the margins of the society by providing them with insights and intellectual tools they can use to empower themselves’ (Leonard, 1990). Mullaly (2007) while according Marx as the founder of critical theory, stipulates that it has been extended and developed by the Frankfurt School (most notably Theodore Adorno, Max Horkheimer and Herbert Marcuse) and its heir apparent, Jurgen Habermas.

Leona Okakok’s (1989) insightful critique of the education system under the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) programme of the United States notes that educating a child means equipping him or her with the capability to succeed in the world he or she will live in. She also made a powerful (and political) statement that “education is more than book learning, it is also value-learning” (p. 254). Indeed, to equip a child with the capability to exist in the world requires value judgments about what that child needs to succeed. When we look at the deplorable success rate of the Bodos and other tribal students of Assam in the Board Examinations, we see that the values, ideas, and priorities embedded in SSA (a programme similar to the NCLB in the United States) are not necessarily shared within tribal nations and indigenous communities.

By the imposition of its uniform curriculum, pedagogy and teacher qualities the present schooling system under the Sarva Siksha Abhiyan is moving further away from providing an effective, high-quality, and culturally sensitive education to tribal children. In this regard, several scholars have advocated for a culturally responsive schooling in the context of education for the tribal children and youth (Castagno & Brayboy, 2008; Kaomea, 2003; Klug & Whitfield, 2003)

Various scholars also focus their attention on different aspects of education; some speak only of curriculum, others only of pedagogy, and others of the entire schooling process (disciplinary policies, classroom management, building design, etc.). For the purpose of this article, we will use Ismat’s definition of ‘culturally responsive curriculum,’ as quoted by Klug and Whitfield (2003), they note:

Ismat (1994) characterizes culturally responsive curriculum as that which (a) capitalizes on students’ cultural backgrounds rather than attempting to override or negate them; (b) is good for all students; (c) is integrated and interdisciplinary; (d) is authentic and child centered, connected to children’s real lives; (e) develops critical thinking skills; (f) incorporates cooperative learning and whole language strategies; (g) is supported by staff development and pre-service preparation; and (h) is part of a coordinated, building wide strategy.

Thus, we find that there is wide scholarship available that calls for a culturally responsive curriculum for creating a classroom that respects diversity and ensures the self worth of all children.

In conclusion, we suggest that schools offer foreign lessons in art, craft, and values – this approach tends to erase Bodo suffering, hardship, and oppression. It disconnects the Bodo mind from the Bodo worldview. Therefore, in the words of Adichie (2009)it is now time to tell more uncomfortable stories.

References

 

Baruah, S.L. (2003). A Comprehensive History of Assam. Sage, New Delhi

Castagno, Angelina E. & Brayboy, Bryan McKinley Jones. (2008). Culturally Responsive Schooling for Indigenous Youth: A Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 78, No. 4 (Dec., 2008), pp. 941-993.

Freire, Paulo. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum Publishing, New York

Gait, E. (1905). A History of Assam. Bina Library, Guwahati

Hazarika, S. (1994). Strangers of the Mist: Tales of war and peace from northeast. Penguin, New Delhi

Kaomea, Julie. (2003). Reading Erasures and Making the Familiar Strange: Defamiliarizing Methods for Research in Formerly Colonized and Historically Oppressed Communities. Educational Researcher, Vol. 32, No. 2 (Mar., 2003), pp. 14-25

Klug, B., & Whitfield, P. (2003). Widening the circle: Culturally relevant pedagogy for American Indian students. New York: Routledge.

Leonard, Stephen. (1990). Critical Theory in Political Practice. Cited in Mullaly, Robert, P. (2007). The Pursuit of Social Justice: Structural Social Work; Paper presented at the Social Work Conference titled `Knowledge, Policy and Service: A Dialogue Between East and West on Social Work’’, the East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, October 28, 07.

Mullaly, Robert P. (1993). Structural Social Work: Ideology, Theory and Practice. M&S, Ontario.

Mullaly, Robert, P. (2007). The Pursuit of Social Justice: Structural Social Work; Paper presented at the Social Work Conference titled `Knowledge, Policy and Service: A Dialogue Between East and West on Social Work’’, the East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, October 28, 07.

Okakok, L. (1989). Serving the purpose of education. Harvard Educational Review, 59(4), 405-422.

Prabhakar, M. S. (2003). Territories of fear. Frontline, 20:24, November 22, 2003

Roy, Ajoy. (1995). The Bodo Imbroglio. Spectrum Publications, New Delhi

Shklovsky, V. (1965). Art as Technique (L. T. Lemon & M. J. Reis, Trans.). In L. T. Lemon & M. J. Reis (Eds.), Russian Formalist Criticism (pp. 3-24). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. (Original work published in 1917)

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2002). Identity politics. Retrieved on September 10, 2007, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity politics/

St. Denis, V. (2007). Aboriginal Education and Anti-Racist Education: Building Alliances across Cultural and Racial Identity. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l’éducation, Vol. 30, No. 4, Coalition Work in Indigenous Educational Contexts / Le travail de coalition et l’éducation des autochtones (2007), pp. 1068-1092

United Nations. (2007). United Nations General Assembly Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. International Legal Materials, Vol. 46, No. 6 (November 2007), pp. 1013-1021

Have you like this article?