Encounters/Encuentros/Rencontres on Education

Vol. 15, 2014, 239-249

Personal reflections on anti-racism education

for a global context

George J. Sefa Dei

OISE, University of Toronto, Canada

I n this essay, I reflect on anti-racism as a discourse and practice, as well as ways

to bring critical conversations to race. We do not live in a post-racial context; it is a
myth and illusion to hold to a contrary view. Events such as Trayvon Martin’s murder
case and the silencing around race, not to mention the open disrespect shown to a
President supposedly elected in a post-racial context in the US, should demonstrate
that race is far from being irrelevant or transcended. We come to understand the
significance of race when the public view of Martin’s murderer is split along lines of
race: whites largely believing his innocence and insisting race was not a factor, while
blacks and other racial minorities were largely convinced of George Zimmerman’s
guilt and hold a deep conviction that race was a factor. While it is through the social
media that the outcry/pressure to arrest Zimmerman was generated, we can still be
critical. The failure of the public, and of opinion makers, to use the moment to speak
about race in society is itself constitutive of the silencing of race. The unspeakability
of race clearly shows its significance. Of course, there must be nuanced readings of
race, but I would add that this has always been the case. Race has never been all about
skin colour nor thought of exclusively along the lines of a black-white duality. Skin
colour is a critical aspect of any discussions on race, but it is not the only measure
or reading of race identity. It is unfortunate that those who highlight the saliency of
skin colour are often heard as simply seeing race as just about skin colour, or rejecting
the intersectionality of our multiple identities. We must not confuse the desire to
articulate the ways skin color constitutes rewards, privilege, and also punishment for
different peoples to mean race essentialism.
Race has been about identity and identity formation, as well as a key princi-
ple of social organization (Omi & Winant, 1993). Race and anti-racism education
is a major task and responsibility for the contemporary educator and learner. In
the following discussion, I allude to a collective in arguing that we must all take

ISSN 1925-8992
http://dx.doi.org/10.15572/ENCO2014.13
© Encounters/Encuentros/Rencontres on Education • 239
G. J. S. Dei

education seriously. This is because education either does something to you, or it

does something for you. Education can be misdirected to constitute “miseducation.”
We can deny our true sense of self and the collective and how we are implicated in
systems of domination and oppression. We can lose a deep sense of our shared huma-
nity and the collective responsibilities that reside within it, and, as consequence, miss
an opportunity to create a better future for all. Fortunately, through education we
can gain critical consciousness of ourselves and of our place in communities. While
education alone is not enough to address the dynamism of racisms and social oppres-
sions (we need policies, personal and collective action, and so forth), I believe in the
power of education and ideas to ignite community transformation. Education can
help young learners to develop interrogative voices to speak about social oppressions
and relations of domination. Their self-efficacy as critical thinkers and their capacity
for resistance against hegemonic systems and institutions are nurtured. We can use
such knowledge and action-oriented pedagogies to challenge privilege and power
and to subvert the status quo. Through critical anti-racism education, we are able to
clarify the functions of white power/privilege, and how it masquerades as normal,
universal, reasonable, and natural to the extent that those punished by such power
may even develop fantasies, desires, and aspirations of whiteness.
Without a doubt, education has a role to play in meeting the challenges and pos-
sibilities of diversity and difference. In beginning this process, education must be able
to engage race and social difference as intrinsic to the identities and lived experiences
of learners. This is the crux of anti-racism education. In fact, a long time ago (Dei,
1996), borrowing from the pioneering ideas of earlier anti-racist scholars in Britain
and Canada (for example, Barry Troyna, Enid Lee, and Barbara Thomas), I defined
anti-racism education as an action-oriented educational practice to address racism
and the interstices of difference (such as gender, ethnicity, class, sexuality, ability, lan-
guage, and religion) in the educational system. Race powerfully implicates and orients
schooling, and any education that sweeps race under the carpet is a miseducation of
the learner. I will not devote the limited space of this paper to engage the scholarly
debates and contentions around the race concept. Suffice to say, racism makes race
real and so we must deal with both race and racism as tangible, living, and operative
things in/over our world. We cannot address racism without acknowledging the scho-
larly, conceptual, and practical understandings of race (see Omi & Winant, 1993).
Race has political merits, material consequences, and profound social effects. Race
demarcates life chances. Thus, race is neither an illusion nor a myth. It is real and
alive in the everydayness of racism, and is embedded in the very foundations of our
society and social structures. I understand the idea of race, not as an objective human
condition, but more as a subjective identity marker and lived experience that exceeds
the limits of scientific, natural, fixed, and bounded categories. Yet, race speaks of
socio-historical processes and human social condition. It is for these reasons that we
need anti-racism to challenge the full effects of race and racism. Centering questions
of race and racism in schooling means bringing to the fore broader questions about
colonialism, European imperialist expansion unto Indigenous lands and territories,
and the discretionary use of white power and privilege through the sanctioning of

240 • Encounters 15, 2014, 239-249

 Personal reflections on anti-racism education

institutions to claim a false sense of entitlement.

Fanon (1967a) challenges the idea that racism is “a constant of the human spirit”
(p. 41) and argues instead that, in fact, colonialism and racism are intricately linked
and they both feed on each other. To him, colonialism cannot exist without imperia-
lism to politically, militarily, culturally, and economically support it. Fanon would go
on to argue that “colonial racism is no different from any other racism” (p. 88) and
that “European civilization and its best representatives are responsible for colonial
racism” (p. 90). The inferiority complex of the colonized subject does not predate
colonization. This complex “is the correlative to the European feeling of superiority”
(p. 93). It is the racist who creates the inferiority of the colonized. The colonial and
imperial power of Europe is built on a racist structure, and Europe throughout hu-
man history has acted on its racist potentialities. Colonialism has economic, spiritual,
material, psychological, and emotional consequences for the colonized. It is not only
the seizure/dispossession of Indigenous lands and property and wealth through co-
lonialism, but there occurs a colonization of the mind and perversion of the values
of Europe as superior to those of the colonized/Indigenous worlds. The task of anti-
racism is to link the material, psychological, spiritual, and economic consequences of
the colonialism-racism dialectic and to devise anti-racist strategies that empower co-
lonized peoples globally to challenge/resist/fight ongoing colonizations and racisms
that deny their basic humanity. Anti-racist education would challenge this false sense
of superiority and unearned white privilege, and help restore the basic humanity of
the colonized body.
Increasingly so, we need anti-racism education that moves beyond borders and
boundaries to implicate global communities. There is a need for additional perspec-
tives to inform critical dialogues on anti-racism education. For educators of today,
important first steps might include understanding the dictates of global anti-racist
education and what strategies and efforts (pedagogically, instructionally, and com-
munication-wise) can be put in place to ensure equitable and effective outcomes
for all learners. There must be an understanding of global anti-racist education that
moves beyond some merely intellectualizing transformative projects to concretely
engage educational practices that help subvert colonial and racist relations and power
hierarchies of conventional schooling. Such education must subvert the assumed
normalcy and many of our privileged “taken for granted assumptions.” However,
bringing the “global” into such discussions is tricky because of the cultural, political,
and intellectual baggage often associated with the term. As I have noted elsewhere
(Dei 2013a), dominant conceptions of global education quickly tout such virtues
of a) the global interdependence of our worlds and communities; b) commitment
to fundamental freedoms and rights of all peoples; c) acknowledging cultural diver-
sity and tolerance of intercultural differences; and d) the belief in the efficacy and
power of individual action by the learner (Abdi, 2006; Abdi, Puplampu, & Dei,
2006; Golmohamad, 2008; Mundy & Manion, 2008; Peters, Britton, & Blee 2008;
Wright, 2011, p. 7). There is nothing wrong with these assumptions. They are lauda-
ble if carried through. However, the problem is that these assumptions do not go far
enough to fundamentally ensure the true goals and purpose of education. The global

Encounters 15, 2014, 239-249 • 241

G. J. S. Dei

itself is a site of contention. It is a site where transnational identities are formed,

in constant flux and contestations – a stage shaped by the exaltation of particular
peoples and ideas, and the historical and ongoing erasure of others. It is a site where
power (particularly White power) and privilege is often denied or taken for granted
in the meta-narrative of the universal. This often sets the tone for all discussions of
the global. The ‘global’ assumes Western Europe as the transcendent point of human
history and intellectuality.
The problematic hegemonic constructions of ‘global’ and what one can interpret
as the theoretical, philosophical, and practical desires to collapse local, national, and
international borders and boundaries, and to imagine and re-configure new futures
raise some interesting questions of the global: Where is the urgency to deal con-
cretely with power, privilege, and our relative complicities in existing colonial and
oppressive relations and the persistent structural inequities that mark the ‘global’?
Beyond debates of whether there is in fact a global arena of education to speak of, are
the questions of who speaks for and shapes this arena, for what purposes, and using
what tools to do so. What power relationships have sought to organize the world in
the search for harmony and passive integration in the global public sphere? Why is
it that global education for the most part has been pursued as a civilizing, colonial,
and imperial imposition on everyone, but especially those who do not hold power
(Charania, 2011)?
It goes without saying that the current mantra of global education is anchored in
the dictates of corporate capital agendas and commercial interests, with its own lan-
guage of choice, freedoms, privatization, and market ideologies (Kaye, 1992; Peters,
Britton, & Blee, 2008; Portelli & Solomon, 2001; Portelli & Vibert, 2001). If we
are to dialogue courageously on global anti-racist education and its international
dimensions, we cannot fail to ground the conceit of the global and in particular of
globalization processes with its imperialistic tendencies. Today, globalization masque-
rades as an infinite series of universal opportunities. But is it? Globalization speaks of
a problematic universality. Many have long wondered if in fact the universal is not an
imposed particularity of the West. For example, in the name of globalization, we are
increasingly witnessing a brain drain moving from global South to the global North.
This describes the ways the global North continues to ‘mine’ the global South (that
is, people in this ‘mining’ system are reduced to resources which can be extracted
and exploited for economic agendas) – a reinvigoration of what is fundamentally the
same colonial relationship(s) of centuries past. In the same way, education in the era
of globalization is seen as a commodity for export. These commodities are themselves
heavily racialized, as African, South Asian, and Latin American labour is increasin-
gly mined and transplanted in Western-serving markets. We must be mindful of
business-minded approaches to education, driven by profits more than by concerns
of social responsibility. The global South has largely been seen as both resource expor-
ters and potential markets for the reselling of Western goods. Countries of the Global
South have become markets for educational models, reforms, and development (for
example, NGOs, World Bank/IMF educational policy documents for Africa and the
Caribbean, and so on) (Dei, 2012).

242 • Encounters 15, 2014, 239-249

 Personal reflections on anti-racism education

Global anti-racist education should equip the contemporary learner with multiple
lenses of critical inquiry of knowledge. This would allow learners to be able to con-
front issues and questions from multiple stances, noting the different ways of coming
to know and understand. There must be an explicit rejection of the hierarchization of
epistemologies. Making visible the ways in which Western notions of rationalism and
objectivism are predicated on the elevation of an absolute and singular truth, at the
expense of other knowledge systems, paves the way to opening up pedagogical space
for counter-knowledges to emerge. One of the responsibilities of today’s educator is
to help learners understand the complexities of society. Global anti-racist education
must help promote effective communal living as based on mutual trust and respect
for each other, and the sanctity of human life as significant to sustaining the commu-
nity. Global anti-racist education must help connect learners with their (individual
and collective) rights and social responsibilities. Pursuing schooling and education
should be conceived of as a communal resource intended for the good of humanity.
Identity must be linked with knowledge production to develop critical consciousness
among learners of today. Identity is the gradual process of coming to know oneself –
that is, knowing who one is as a learner and a human being, and how the learner and
human subject comes to know about communities and their environments. The sub-
ject is multiplex with myriad and connecting identities. Each identity is significant
to understand the human life course. Anti-racism education insists on race, gender,
class, sexuality, (dis)ability, ethnicity, language, religion, and spirituality, as part of
our identities in terms of who we are as persons. It is the interstices of such differen-
ces that make us whole as subjects and communities. Education today must assist
learners to comprehend such complexities. Education must also be accessible to those
who seek to responsibly develop critical consciousness and serve their communities.
We currently live in a moment of rising costs for college and university education
– best evidenced by high tuition fees, students accruing huge debts upon completion
of their academic programs, and so forth. In addition to the ongoing cuts at colleges
and universities, racial minority and working class communities in particular have
traditionally had less access to the higher education in the West. So the questions we
must ask are: How do we address the question of access to postsecondary education
to ensure “excellence” is possible for all students, while also remaining cognizant that
equality of opportunity is only possible given the equality of condition? How do
we measure and come to achieve such educational excellence by addressing broader
questions of equity? That is, how are we making this excellence accessible to a wider
section of our communities? Who is represented, how, and why? Who is teaching in
our schools, colleges, and universities, and how is our curriculum diversified to en-
sure that we are telling multiple stories? How are we making the knowledge and edu-
cation relevant to the communities from where we draw our students? Are we making
honest and sufficient attempts to provide educational outreach to our communities?
How are we getting clear-enough defining our mandate, and the responsibilities that
come with that, for educators and schools?
Part of the challenge of decolonized, anti-racist global education should be about
making students feel a sense of welcome and a sense of belonging in their educational

Encounters 15, 2014, 239-249 • 243

G. J. S. Dei

settings. (In the context of anti-racism global education, “decolonization” refers to

the ways education is used to rid the world of colonial knowledge hierarchies, that
are themselves racialized through the logics of white supremacist thought, in both its
historical and ongoing formations). Students must feel empowered to define them-
selves in terms of who they are, what they are going to do with their education, and
what they see as their broader responsibilities to each other and to their communities.
All students should see themselves in a curriculum that broadly includes textbooks
and teaching methods, as well as the whole culture, environment, and the socio-
organizational lives of schools.
At the same time, we cannot speak of decolonization and of anti-racist education
that mobilizes racialized, Indigenous, and Aboriginal communities without frank
and honest dialogue on shared implications and responsibilities. Notwithstanding
the variegated ways colonialism, imperialism, and racialization has scripted different
lives, our resistances show the strengths of collective struggles. The place and parti-
cularly the Lands on which we sit offer rich sources of knowledge and, by extension,
important implications as to what to do with such knowledges. Land is about acting
responsibly and implicating ourselves in the relations of domination and exploitation
that take place on occupied or settled Lands. More specifically, anti-racism education
demands that we implicate ourselves in the continuum of histories and processes that
have led to our residing on particular Lands. Oppressions operate within systems,
and they are about shared collective experiences. The fact that such experiences are
shared does not mean they are singular. To assert that by accentuating our shared
experiences we risk making claims of similar or even singular experiences, is often
a selective reading caught in the binary modes of thought so prevalent in Western
interpretations and intellectual circles. For me, the question of where one is coming
from is critical to my anti-racist practice.
Colonialism and colonization are ongoing everywhere. But there is also a scaled
severity of resulting issues and consequences for particular bodies at particular mo-
ments in time and space. We must learn to appreciate and understand our divergent
experiences and how these shape how we come to know without engaging in the
intellectual arrogance of believing in “expert knowers,” or, as often alluded to in the
Western academy, “rigorous” or “theoretically sophisticated” scholarship. This is not
just simply about ways the academy rewards a proximity to whiteness. It is a way
of policing and silencing particular discourses from particular bodies. It is also an
intellectual arrogance that smacks in the face of Indigenous ways of knowing and
its opposition to knowledge hierarchies. We cannot diminish the severity of colonial
and imperial oppressions everywhere on an understanding that colonized bodies have
now migrated to occupy stolen lands, and are in complicity with the European settler
to deny Indigenous peoples their sovereignty. In the Canadian context, settlerhood is
the historical practice of land dispossession and land repurposing, physical violence,
genocide, and dehumanization of Indigenous peoples. Forced or willing migration
to this space does not easily make one complicit in the same ways the original white
settlers migrated and advanced the colonial project. Nor does the migration of other
racialized and Indigenous peoples level the ‘playing field’ of settler colonialism and

244 • Encounters 15, 2014, 239-249

 Personal reflections on anti-racism education

its inherited benefits. The racialized migrant subject is certainly implicated in settler
colonialism and has a responsibility in Aboriginal peoples’ struggle over land and so-
vereignty everywhere. This fact should not be in dispute, nor do I dispute it here. Yet,
as Andrea Smith has said of anti-racism scholars, “we need to look at how ‘settlers’
are differentiated through white supremacy… without a critique of the settler state
as simultaneously also white supremacist, all ‘settlers’ become morally undifferen-
tiated” (Smith, 2010). I want to take Smith’s observation a step further, in arguing
that the very term ‘settler’ is itself too often used to mask the particularity of white
supremacist logic and colonial violence, by conflating the myriad differences between
racialized migrants and white bodies.
The body of the knowledge producer and the context and tradition within which
such knowledge is produced are always very important considerations. Personally,
the question of on behalf of what, whom, and why we do our scholarship/intellectual
work on anti-racism is germane to my work. So I express more firmly the what, how,
and why of affirming Indigenous identities. For example, in my ongoing work on
anti-racism and anti-colonial education, I employ Indigenous epistemologies groun-
ded in my African identity that seek to threaten, replace, and reimagine alternatives
to colonial thinking and practice. I do this with the hope of contributing to a robust
epistemological framework that allows for the coexistence of, and conversation bet-
ween, multiple epistemes. Through this work I explore three arguments. First, our
epistemological frameworks must consider the body of the knowledge producer and
the place and context in which knowledge is produced. Second, the anti-colonial is
intimately connected to decolonization, and, by extension, decolonization cannot
happen solely through Western scholarship. Third, the complex problems and cha-
llenges facing the world today defy universalist solutions, and instead can be reme-
died by multi-centric ways of knowing/doing/being.
By claiming my Indigeneity in a diasporic context, I employ a scholarly entry
point for anti-racism that primarily empowers the racially disempowered. (In this
way I see diasporic Indigeneity and race as closely related concepts). My politics of
race is to evoke what, borrowing from Spivak, I would call a “strategic essentialism of
anti-racist practice” to signal the salience of race. I have seen on countless occasions
how the fluidity of identities can be unwittingly deployed to counter the salience of
race. This salience is about a pre-eminence, not a hierarchy of identity. Similarly, the
concept of undifferentiated whiteness is deployed as a conceptual tool to dismantle
white supremacy. I, therefore, seek to affirm essentialized racial/Indigenous identities
to challenge white supremacist underpinnings. But beyond the self, we must move to
a political collective action for organized change.
I would like anti-racism to broach the question of knowledge production in the
(Western) academy more forcefully, by situating Indigenous ways of knowing from
around the world in our practices. I would not spend too much time responding or
writing back to critiques to infantilize or engage in the primitivization of Indigenous
knowledges. In fact, as many others have rightly observed, critiques of the Indigenous
and particularly Indigenous knowledge has less to do with a supposed lack of theo-
retical sophistication. It has more to do with how such bodies of knowledge sit with

Encounters 15, 2014, 239-249 • 245

G. J. S. Dei

bodies of privilege (Battiste & Henderson, 2000). These dominant bodies think they
must control, legitimize, and validate all knowledge production and theory produced
in/by the academy. A clear example is when Eurocentric standards are applied to
measure the worth of Indigenous knowing, such that knowledge is only legitimate if
it is pursued in terms acceptable to the dominant (Andreotti, Ahenakew, & Cooper,
2011). For racially oppressed scholars, our anti-racism should be about exercising
our intellectual agencies by offering Indigenous-centred and anti-racist informed
standpoints that help subvert an aggressive ideology that seeks to monopolize inte-
llectual space. We must continually ask: How is it that Europe has time and again
continually succeeded in inserting and asserting itself onto the African, Asian, and
Aboriginal realities (Asante, 2013)? We must also challenge the problem of viewing
Indigenous knowledges as a racial and colonial subset of knowledge. Anti-racism
engagement of knowledge is to note that there will be intellectual resistance to seeing
ourselves in certain conversations, but to also be bold in naming our implications and
responsibilities (for example, race, Indigeneity, and colonization). We are punished
for naming Indigeneity, for colonialism, and for remembering our histories (hooks,
1989). Indigeneity is about the power of historical and cultural memory. It is about
resisting the push to forget and to erase colonial occupations and white colonial sett-
lerhood on global Indigenous peoples’ Lands.
I want to address the politics of claiming space and what a former student in one
of my classes at OISE/UT calls the “politics of territoriality” (Abraham, 2010). To
claim space is a political act. Not every space is easily accessible. We have gate-keepers
who not only discipline unwanted bodies who show up in guarded spaces, but also
use their power and privilege to open the space to particular bodies. The racialization
of space has been a subject of critical discussion in anti-racism (as explored by Razack,
2002, among many others). For anti-racism work, we need to focus on how racialized
bodies not only resist such closure, but also engage in transformative work when they
come to claim spaces traditionally off-limits to them. These politics demand that we
both continue and move beyond fighting to keep spaces and doors open. It is also
about asking ourselves what to do when we come into such spaces. We cannot simply
insist on our presence in such spaces. We must pursue a radical politics that trans-
forms our institutions by using our presence to intervene, disrupt, and implement
alternatives. We have to assert voices that upset and subvert the status quo. We must
become a voice of difference and translate any false sense of entitlements into meanin-
gful political action for change. There must be a hegemonic rupturing of the space
that includes articulating counter and oppositional voices, Indigenous knowledges,
and anti-colonial praxis. We must challenge the temptation to look to the dominant
to seek validation, acceptance, and legitimacy in still-colonized spaces of knowledge
production and education. Such practices of looking to the dominant can be woun-
ding emotionally, spiritually, and to the psyche. Fanon (1967b) long ago cautioned
against a colonial mimicry that disclaims our authentic souls and dismembers selves.
Any sense of complacency and feeling that we have entered or come into these spaces
through our individual hard work/merit or excellence must be challenged.
Opening doors has been a historic struggle for racialized bodies and our

246 • Encounters 15, 2014, 239-249

 Personal reflections on anti-racism education

communities, just as it has been for women, LGBTQ people, linguistic and religious
minorities, and working class communities. Through resistance, excluded bodies
have found some measure of inclusion. But the struggle for inclusion is far from over.
There are concerns circling the question of inclusion, such as: For what ends and
purposes is it sought? How is our inclusion subversive of the status quo? In effect, the
politics of coming into a given space requires an awareness of the histories of struggles
and the responsibility to uphold the goals and dreams of the pioneers who fought
to open doors. Anything less is betraying their cause and associated sacrifices. We
should also avoid being seduced by false hopes that because we are included, the stru-
ggle has been won. In fact, inclusion is just the beginning. It is important to always
assess what happens to different bodies when they come into previously exclusionary
spaces. For example, how are they sustained and how are their voices, experiences,
and histories taken up as part of everyday learning and academic inquiry? The poli-
tics of coming into an exclusionary space for the subordinate is to subvert whiteness
(and white power) and its rationality for dominance. It requires that we champion
community causes rather than be preoccupied with our individual advances and ac-
complishments. It demands that we do not become aloof from our communities,
estranged from the practical struggles we remain part of, and that we not be enticed
to study our communities from a distance (Dei, 2013b). Such intellectual closeness
to struggle and emphasis on embodied knowledges that flow from lived experience is
precisely what anti-racism is all about.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Aman Sium and Eunice Chow – graduate students of the
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto – for reading, edi-
ting, and commenting on drafts of this paper.

References
Abdi, A. A. (2006). Culture of education, social development, and globalization: Historical
and current analyses of Africa. In A. A. Abdi, K. P. Puplampu, & G. J. S. Dei (Eds.),
African education and globalization: Critical perspectives (pp. 13-30). Lanham, MD: Rowman
& Littlefield Publishers.
Abraham, A. (2011, Fall). African and Western knowledge synthesis. (Unpublished
course paper, SES 1924H: Modernization, Development and Education in African Context).
Department of Sociology and Equity Studies, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
of the University of Toronto.
Andreotti, V., Ahenakew, C., & Cooper, G. (2011). Epistemological pluralism: Ethical and
pedagogical challenges in higher education. (Unpublished paper).

Encounters 15, 2014, 239-249 • 247

G. J. S. Dei

Asante, M. (2013, August 7). Decolonizing universities in Africa: An approach to transfor-

mation. Keynote address at the International Conference of African Scholars, Nelson
Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa.
Battiste, M., & Henderson, J. Y. (2000). What is indigenous knowledge? In M. Battiste &
J. Y. Henderson, Protecting indigenous knowledge and heritage (pp. 35-56). Saskatoon, SK:
Purich.
Charania, G. (2011). Grounding the global: A call for more situated practices of pedagogical
and political engagement. ACME: An International EJournal for Critical Geographies, 10(3),
351-371.
Dei, G. J. S. (1996). Anti-racism education: Theory and practice. Halifax, NS: Fernwood
Publishing.
Dei, G, J. S. (2012, April 13-17). Interrogating global citizenship education from an indi-
genous knowledge perspective. Paper presented on the panel session on Re-imagining the
‘global citizenship’ discourse: A view from the contexts of developing countries, Annual Meeting of
the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Vancouver, BC.
Dei, G. J. S. (2013a, forthcoming). Global education from an ‘indigenist anti-colonial’ pers-
pective. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Education.
Dei, G. J. S. (2013b, under review). The African scholar. Journal of Black Studies.
Fanon, F. (1967a). Toward the African revolution. New York, NY: Grove Press/Monthly Review
Press.
Fanon, F. (1967b). Black skin, white masks. New York, NY: Grove Press.
Golmohamad, M. (2008). Global citizenship: From theory to practice, unlocking hearts
and minds. In M. A. Peters, A. Britton, & H. Blee (Eds.), Global citizenship education:
Philosophy, theory and pedagogy (pp. 519-533). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
hooks, b. (1989). Talking back: Thinking feminist, thinking black. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Kaye, H. J. (1992). Education and democracy: Should the fact that we live in a democra-
tic society make a difference in what our schools are like? In J. L. Kincheloe & S. R.
Steinberg (Eds.), Thirteen questions: Reframing education’s conversation (pp. 125-134). New
York, NY: Peter Lang.
Mundy, K., & Manion, C. (2008). Global education in Canadian elementary schools: An
exploratory study. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(4), 941-974.
Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1993). On the theoretical concept of race. In C. McCarthy & W.
Crichlow (Eds.), Race identity and representation in education (pp. 3-10). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Peters, M. A., Britton, A., & Blee, H. (Eds.). (2008). Global citizenship education: Philosophy,
theory and pedagogy. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Portelli, J. P., & Solomon, R. P. (2001). Introduction. In J. P. Portelli & R. P. Solomon
(Eds.), The erosion of democracy in education: From critique to possibilities (pp. 15-28). Calgary,
AB: Detselig Enterprises, Ltd.
Portelli, J. P., & Vibert, A. B. (2001). Beyond common educational standards: Towards a
curriculum of life. In J. P. Portelli & R. P. Solomon (Eds.), The erosion of democracy in
education: From critique to possibilities (pp. 63-82). Calgary, AB: Detselig Enterprises, Ltd.
Porfilio, B., & Malott, C. (Eds.). (2008). The destructive path of neoliberalism: An international
examination of urban education. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

248 • Encounters 15, 2014, 239-249

 Personal reflections on anti-racism education

Razack, S. H. (Ed.). (2002). Race, space and the law: Unmapping the white settler society. Toronto,
ON: Between the Lines.
Smith, A. (2010). Indigeneity, settler colonialism, white supremacy. Global Dialogue, 12(2).

Encounters 15, 2014, 239-249 • 249