Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Exploring the possibilities of a post-critical approach to student north-south mobility experiences :… Sutherland, Ali 2018

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
24-ubc_2018_may_sutherland_ali.pdf [ 852.57kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 24-1.0363916.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0363916-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0363916-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0363916-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0363916-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0363916-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0363916-source.json
Full Text
24-1.0363916-fulltext.txt
Citation
24-1.0363916.ris

Full Text

  EXPLORING THE POSSIBILITIES OF A POST-CRITICAL APPROACH TO STUDENT NORTH-SOUTH MOBILITY EXPERIENCES: A CASE STUDY OF THE SOCIAL INNOVATION AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM IN FORTALEZA, BRAZIL  by  ALI SUTHERLAND  B.A.H, Queen’s University, 2015     A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF    MASTER OF ARTS   in    THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES   (Educational Studies)   THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA  (Vancouver)      February 2018     © Ali Sutherland, 2018    ii  Abstract North to South mobility experiences are increasingly offered as components of higher education, be it in the form of international service learning or study abroad. While these experiences are often associated with transformation on the part of the participants, the conceptualizations of what this transformation is or could be are dependent on whether it is undertaken through a traditional, critical or post-critical conceptual approach. This study grows out of an identified lack of well-documented alternatives to the dominant (traditional and critical) approaches to North-South mobility experiences in higher education as well as a frustration with scholarly work that is limited to critique. This thesis explores the possibility of a post-critical approach to educational North to South mobility experiences and how this might foster transformation that shifts how participants of the program relate to themselves, others, and knowledge. This thesis aims to investigate how a post-critical conceptualization, as distinct from a traditional or critical one, might contribute to widened possibilities for the North to South mobility encounter in higher education that could allow for dominant narratives and affective patterns to begin to be disrupted.   This research study is an intrinsic case study which included participant observation and in-depth semi-structured interviews with participants of the Social Innovation and Community Development program in Fortaleza, Brazil in 2017. The case is a living example of the tensions and paradoxes inherent in North to South mobility experiences. The findings that emerge illustrate the challenges of articulation and challenges of design involved in implementing an educational North to South mobility experience characterized by a post-critical approach. The analysis showed that participants’ experiences of transformation were very much framed within the scripts that are most dominant and available to them. The case study highlighted challenges of articulation and design of a post-critical approach, but also demonstrated how there continues to be pedagogical potential in these types of encounters to engage with an education that disrupts the persistent narratives and desires that constrain relationships (with self, others and knowledge) in ways that are epistemologically and ontologically limiting.    iii  Lay Summary North to South mobility experiences are increasingly offered as components of higher education, be it in the form of international service learning or study abroad. While these experiences are often associated with transformation on the part of the participants, what this transformation is or could be is dependent on whether it is undertaken through a traditional, critical or post-critical conceptual approach. This study grows out of an identified lack of well-documented alternatives to the dominant (traditional and critical) approaches to North-South mobility experiences in higher education as well as a frustration with scholarly work that is limited to critique. I explore the possibility of a post-critical approach to educational North to South mobility experiences and how this might foster transformation that shifts how participants of the program relate to themselves, others, and knowledge and allow for dominant narratives and affective patterns to begin to be disrupted.      iv  Preface This dissertation is an original intellectual product of the author, Ali Sutherland. The fieldwork was covered by the University of British Columbia’s (UBC) Research Ethics Board with the UBC Ethics Certificate number H16-03342.       v  Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................................................ ii Lay Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................ iii Preface ................................................................................................................................................................ .......................... iv Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................................................... v Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................................................. vii Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 Background ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Purpose of the Study .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Description of the Study .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Research Questions ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Outline of Thesis ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 2: Literature Review .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ ........... 6 North to South Mobility Experiences .......................................................................................................................... 6 International Service Learning....................................................................................................................................... 7 Study Abroad ...................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Transformation through Pedagogical Encounters .............................................................................................. 22 Chapter 3: Conceptual Framework ........................................................................................................................... 29 Cognitive Justice ................................................................................................................................................................ 31 Relational Justice ............................................................................................................................................................... 33 Affective Justice ................................................................................................................................................................. 34 Chapter 4: Methodology .................................................................................................................................................. 37 Description of the Study ................................................................................................................................................. 41 Description of the Data ................................................................................................................................................... 43 Chapter 5: Data Presentation and Analysis .......................................................................................................... 48 Camila .................................................................................................................................................................................... 48 Will ..........................................................................................................................................................................................  62 James ................................................................................................................................................................ ...................... 71 Maria ................................................................................................................................................................ ...................... 75 Jay ................................................................................................................................................................ ............................ 80 Chapter 6: Discussion ....................................................................................................................................................... 86 Chapter 7: Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 111 References ...................................................................................................................................117  vi  Appendices ..................................................................................................................................125 Appendix A: Consent Form ........................................................................................................................................ 125 Appendix B: Interview Guides .................................................................................................................................. 128 Appendix C: Pedagogical tools introduced as method for data collection ............................................. 130 Appendix D: Social Innovation and Community Development Spring 2017 Itinerary ..................... 132 Appendix E: Revised version of LACB 3000 and 3005 ................................................................................... 133 Appendix F: Table to show approaches to North-South mobility experiences .................................... 146          vii  Acknowledgements This research would not have been possible without the immense support I received from people all around the world. Thank you to my Mom, Dad and sister, Kate, who encourage my curiosity and love of learning and who have (in different ways) taken up the invitation to learn and unlearn alongside me. I have to resist the urge to name all of my friends who continually support me and encourage my growth and development on a daily basis near and far so as not to start this text with a mini dissertation before we even begin. However, there are several people whose ability to engage with conversations about the end of the world as we know it with laughter and resilience and whose eagerness to engage with me on the thinking that led to this text I want to acknowledge. Naheed Jadavji, thanks for being a constant in my ever shifting world and growing up in tandem. Laura Dale, thanks for being there throughout this period of growth and change.  I am thankful to the many friends and brilliant thinkers with whom I shared a classroom, especially Kate Paterson for the unconditional support and picking up the phone; and Renato, for his generosity of care and patient Portuguese lessons. During my time at UBC I have adopted a small community in Land and Food Systems through the teaching teams of LFS 250 and 350, whose interests, interventions and generosity continuously inspire me. Will Valley’s supervision and encouragement allowed me to experiment with my own pedagogy and philosophy of education in practice; and I am thankful for his modelling of how and why to consider complexity and uncertainty in this encounter.  Thank you to my supervisor, Dr. Vanessa Andreotti, whose mentorship inside and outside of academia has challenged me to rethink how I think and relate to knowledge and has nurtured my development as a scholar by introducing me to a vocabulary that now allows me to play with text even as it shifts the moment I think I might have pinned it down. Beyond this, she has connected me to an innovative and welcoming network of scholars, activists and artists whose work inspires me and through which I have met people like Sharon Stein, whose work and disposition have had enormous influence. Thank you to Dr. Jeannie Kerr and Dr. Alison Taylor, for their invaluable feedback, comments and encouragement.  Above all, I am immensely grateful for the openness and honesty of the five interesting and compassionate individuals who agreed not only to participate in the research but to complicate the relationship of researcher-participant and earnestly encourage our friendships to  viii  develop in tandem. Thank you to the SIT Brazil Academic Director, Bill Calhoun, for opening up his work to me and inviting so many challenging and rewarding conversations that have given me insight into the practical how-to of these programs and showing the power of respect, integrity and a playful disposition that makes people want to stop and listen; his charisma is infectious and has taught me much about leadership. Oelito Brandao’s support during my time in Fortaleza was invaluable- from dealing with my questions to the persistence of his smile and uplifting disposition. The rest of the SIT team, Jessica and Caliny, rounded out the ‘little family’, as Oelito puts it, that I was so hospitably welcomed into. I am grateful that the School for International Training (SIT) also approved my presence in the program as a researcher, at the invitation and backing of Bill. Much is owed to the communities and community organizations who welcomed the program and myself with open arms. I am grateful to have met so many people doing such radical and important work in such various and distinct contexts. Thank you to Instituto dos Pretos Novos, Nativos Paraty, Movimento dos Trabalhadores Sem Terra (especially the settlement in Itapipoca, Ceara who hosted a fruitful and engaging youth gathering), Banco Palmas, the Pituari Reserve, the Tremembe Reserve, Associacao de Mulheres Indigenas do Alto Rio Negro, Centro de Saberes e Medicina Indigena, Beija Flor, Movimento dos Trabalhadores Sem-Teto de Rio de Janeiro e da Bahia, Morro Providencia, and Central Unica das Favelas. I am grateful to have met Joao Paulo Barreto and his students for hosting conversations across difference and Silvio Cavuscens and Asier Ansorena for modelling for me, a perpetual visitor, how visitors can listen to and work with communities that are not their own in meaningful and supportive roles. Eloisa Fuchs and her mother, Julia Dias, and the extraordinary Caterina Dada expanded my time in Brazil in ways that ensured my time spent there was significant beyond the development of the research. This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) through the Joseph-Armand Bombardier Canada Graduate Scholarship and the Michael Smith Foreign Study Supplement. It was also supported by the University of British Columbia Faculty of Education Award. Additionally, my participation in the SSHRC funded project Gesturing Towards Decolonial Futures has expanded my vocabulary in ways that allow me to frame this research below that draws directly on much of the language worked with in this project.   - 1 -  Chapter 1: Introduction Background North to South mobility experiences are increasingly offered as components of higher education, be it in the form of international service learning or study abroad. While these experiences are often associated with transformation on the part of the participants, the conceptualizations of what this transformation is or could be are dependent on whether it is undertaken through a traditional, critical or post-critical conceptual approach1. Recently, there has been growing critique of the dominant forms of North to South mobility experiences for their tendencies to reflect “legacies of imperialism, geo-political interests, [and] historical biases” in ways that leave unquestioned international power relations imbued in narratives of development, progress, universality and innocence (Biles and Lindsey, 2009, p.151). Additionally, there has been increasing academic discussion concerning the risks of North to South mobility experiences in contributing to neocolonial projects (Wright, 2013). As Wright (2013) describes, North to South mobility experiences are “fundamentally linked to questions of power, privilege and the operation of ‘global coloniality’ today...yet, many of the inequalities present within the field are so stark, that they often go unnoticed” (p. 18). This study grows out of an identified lack of well-documented alternatives to the dominant approaches to North-South mobility experiences in higher education as well as a frustration with scholarly work that is limited to critique. I am engaging with a case study of a North-South mobility program which attempts to approach the educational encounter in a way that not only contests these trends, but works to facilitate something that gestures to other and different possibilities. I aim to document the potential for the educational spaces created through North-South mobility experiences to facilitate transformation, in a very specific understanding of the concept.   Purpose of the Study The purpose of the study is to explore how a North-South mobility program can foster transformation that shifts how participants of the program relate to themselves, others, and knowledge. This thesis aims to engage with the selected case to explore how North-South                                                  1 These distinctions are thoroughly explained in the literature review in chapter 2, see p. 11.  - 2 -  mobility experiences might play a role in the pursuit of global justice literacy2 in higher education and what conditions might allow this potential to be realized. In doing so, I aim to build on recent works that show the need for experimenting with further practices of global justice literacy in order to gesture towards decolonial possibilities(Wright, 2013; Stein, 2017; Andreotti, 2016; Gaztambide Fernandez, 2015). I draw on Stein’s (2017) articulation of global justice literacy as the use of pedagogical methods or theoretical concepts that “prepare people to engage the complexity, uncertainty, and plurality of the world” (p.222).  In contemplating the roles of multiple planes of justice within a global justice literacy framework, I devote significant attention to three elements of this framework: cognitive, affective and relational justice (Andreotti, in press).  These elements are key to the specific conceptualization of transformation that I employ throughout this thesis and that is elaborated in the literature review chapter (see p. 27). The possibility for a global justice literacy that emerges from a post-critical transformation that integrates cognitive, relational and affective justice lies in the potential for a North-South mobility experience to provoke a shift in how participants relate to self, others and knowledge.   In exploring the selected program I am not searching for an exemplar, prescriptive or generalizable case, but rather exploring the possibilities of a post-critical approach to educational North to South mobility experiences. While I will unpack the term ‘post-critical’ in more depth in the literature review (see p.17), it is a central concept and thus requires some preliminary clarification. A post-critical educational philosophy works to engage learners in imagining and creating futures that are not emergent from descriptive and prescriptive means (Osberg, 2017). Learners, involved in a post-critical pedagogy, are not made to realize the injustices of the world and then correct them accordingly but are encouraged to disinvest in attachments to epistemic certainty and ontological security that structure their envisioning of social change; thus opening up the possibility for education to instill in learners a nonnormative responsibility (ibid).  By investigating a post-critical conception of transformation in the context of a study abroad program with a service learning component, this research intends to examine the nature of transformations that participants identify as experiencing in the case study program. As some participants self-identify with experiencing transformation while others do not, the research data also allows for an in-depth exploration into what participants believe are the conditions required                                                  2 The concept global justice literacy is discussed, elaborated on and clarified in the Conceptual Framework chapter, see p. 34.   - 3 -  for (their understandings of and aspirations for) transformation to take place (regardless of whether or not those are currently structured into the selected program). This exploration is not guided by a search for a solution or model to the paradoxes or tensions inherent in the field; instead, it draws on post-critical discussions that are emerging to tease out what this approach might offer and in what ways is it insufficient. It is an inquiry into how participants’ relationships to themselves, to others and to knowledge have shifted throughout their experience. This is central because the purpose of the study is, in part, to investigate how a post-critical conceptualization, as distinct from a traditional or critical one, might contribute to widened possibilities for the North-South mobility encounter in higher education that could allow for dominant narratives and affective patterns to begin to be disrupted. My focus on the selected case programme is not intended to be evaluative, rather, I use the programme and the conversations that emerge from it to explore and illuminate the type of transformation made possible through a post-critical approach and the challenges and successes in fostering them. This research therefore aims to inquire how we go beyond critique (without undermining its importance, role and relevance) and examine what is pedagogically useful for North-South mobility encounters in order to learn from current practices, identify what is working and focus on how people engage with the pedagogical successes and challenges of fostering a North-South mobility encounter that disrupts investments in dominant narratives of progress, development, superiority, universality and innocence. Additionally, the purpose of this study is thus to grapple with the question of how education can address ongoing and historical global inequities while also opening up new possibilities for the future that do not reinscribe the same patterns. I explore how a global justice literacy framework, potentially enabled by a post-critical transformation, might have a role to play in seriously considering this question.  Description of the Study I conducted a qualitative intrinsic case study involving participant observation and semi structured interviews of participants in the School for International Training: Social Innovation and Community Development program in Fortaleza, Brazil. An intrinsic case study is an approach to a case study that emphasizes context, depth and breadth of exploration (Stake, 1995; Grandy, 2010). An intrinsic case approach does not avoid generalization, however, the focus is to “generalize from within, rather than from case to case” (ibid). This research intends to generate  - 4 -  insights into the possibilities of a post-critical approach to North to South mobility experiences based on the particularities of the case. It does not seek to compare the program in this case with others, nor does it aim to produce generalizable theory, but rather “strives to capture the richness and complexity of the case” (ibid). An intrinsic case study is therefore an appropriate approach to the exploration of this case and the possibilities of a post-critical approach in this niche of higher education.   The selected case is significant because it is a study abroad program accredited through the School for International Training that also offers a service learning component. Participants of the program are encouraged to consider their complicity in the problems they assume they have come to Brazil to improve and the broader structures and systems in which they are produced (Stein, Andreotti, Susa, & Bruce, 2016). Through the use of “aesthetic, embodied, and spiritual practices, as well as critical intellectual engagements”, the program is designed to allow participants to rediscover “a sense of connection with one’s body, creative forces, other people and other-than-human beings” (Stein et al. 2016). The program centers the “teaching of ethical relationships and embodied presence in creating the conditions for transformative pedagogical encounters” (Kerr, 2013, ii). Therefore, it was an excellent site for inquiry into how transformation that goes beyond the dominant narratives of North-South mobility encounters can be provoked by a post-critical orientation and educational approach.   Research Questions: 1. How do participants demonstrate that their relationships to themselves, to others, and to knowledge have shifted, been challenged, or been reinforced through the Social Innovation and Community Development program? 2. How do participants articulate how they identify or disidentify with an experience of transformation in the Social Innovation and Community Development program? What conditions do the participants identify as being required for transformation to take place? 3. What were perceived as effective and limiting pedagogical efforts to foster global justice literacy in the Social innovation and community development program?     - 5 -  Outline of the Thesis: This thesis is comprised of five chapters. In this introductory chapter I have situated the research questions I explore in the context of North to South mobility experiences, the purpose and significance of this study, and a description of what the study itself entails. The second chapter is the literature review which traces three conceptual models of service learning (traditional, critical and post-critical) and how they engender distinct possibilities for transformation as an emergence of the learning encounter. Included in this literature review is a deeper exploration of North to South mobility experiences and the trends and critiques of dominant practices as observed in the subfields of International Service Learning and Study Abroad literature. This chapter is fundamental in that it lays out how I understand and employ ‘post-critical’ and ‘transformation’ throughout this work: two concepts which are crucial to this text. The third chapter is the conceptual framework which outlines the global justice literacy framework which underlies much of this research, and highlights a significant emphasis and investigation of cognitive, affective and relational justice as key components of this framework. The fourth chapter is the methodology which outlines both my approach to the case study and the methods I undertook in constructing it. The fifth chapter presents and describes the data I gathered. It includes quotations and excerpts from the participants’ interview transcripts as well as my initial interpretations of their narratives in relation to the possibilities of a post-critical approach informed by a global justice literacy framework. The sixth chapter is a discussion of what emerged in the undertaking of this research and outlines the difficulties and paradoxes of implementing a post-critical approach as well as even articulating what such an approach could be. The seventh and final chapter is a collation of my conclusions which seek to draw parallels between what this case study illustrated about the possibilities for a post-critical approach and the possibilities for a post-critical approach to be embraced more broadly in higher education. I conclude with a consideration of how education as a force which shapes how people relate to the future can seriously grapple with the relationship between education, responsible action, and social change without guarantees.      - 6 -  Chapter 2: Literature Review: Ultimately, this thesis is guided by questions and concerns about how North-South student mobility experiences in higher education might allow for a transformation to take place wherein learners are encouraged to deal and cope with their attachments to epistemological certainty and ontological security. In order to make clear why such a transformation is needed in this current moment, to justify this continued focus on the experience of the privileged few, and to outline how the fields of global education, service learning, and study abroad have led us here, I will attempt to weave the conversations taking place in these diverse but overlapping fields to show that there is a need to go beyond critique and towards an exploration of alternatives in non-prescriptive ways.  North-South Student Mobility Practices: Proponents of international service learning and study abroad (both of which fall under the wider umbrella term of North-South student mobility experiences) often speak of their potential to solve or smooth over cross-cultural misunderstandings, prejudiced assumptions, and respond to an ignorance of other cultures. However, many scholars (Zemach-Bersin, 2007; Jefferess, 2008; Bryan, 2013; Heron, 2007) demonstrate that service learning or study abroad has a deep history of and ongoing linkage to colonial and imperialist desires as well as a cultivation of benevolence and moral superiority. The research I conducted did not intend to and did not ‘fix that’. I discuss ISL and Study Abroad because they are the dominant forms through which North-South educational mobility encounters take place and thus I hope to contribute to conversations in those fields around changes in thinking and practice and to complicate those conversations while maintaining a commitment to intelligibility and functionality.  Before I attempt to show why there is a need for North-South mobility encounters that are experimenting with different intentions and ‘outcomes’ than traditional models, I must explain exactly what I mean by ‘North-South mobility experiences’. According to Tiessen and Grantham (2017), North to South mobility experiences are processes and programs in which North American “students travel to countries in the ‘Global South’ for educational purposes including studying, doing practicum placements (co-op, volunteer, experiential learning) or combining study and practicum work” (p. 3).  The work of Wright (2013) further illustrates study abroad as a manifestation of North to South student mobility, which she outlines is an  - 7 -  “emerging dynamic, backed by both public and private interests and supported by the increasing trend of youth travel and volunteerism” and that North to South student mobility “provides a novel opportunity to explore manifestations of decolonial education” (2013, p.18). While the critiques of educational North to South mobility experiences are vast and rigorous, I, like Wright, am intrigued by the potential for these experiences, (as rife with layers of power, privilege and neo-colonial patterns as they are), to open up spaces for alternative modes of engagement, relationships and dispositions. While Wright uses this context to explore manifestations and challenges of decolonial education, I am interested in how educational North to South mobility experiences can be structured and facilitated in a way that opens up the possibilities for engaging with alternatives. In this literature, critiques of both fields are easy to trace, and it is important that I do so in subsequent subsections of this thesis. However, throughout this research I have tried to keep in mind that more critique does not necessarily change the practice of the many3 North-South mobility programs that operate in universities to bring students from the Global North to the Global South4 (be they in ISL, Study Abroad or other contexts). As Wright states, “although concerns regarding privilege and the incorporation of local knowledges have been raised...little to no discussion appears to have occurred regarding the implementation or existence of decolonial education within Study Abroad” (2013, p.22). While I will return to this concept of decolonial education in the conceptual framework chapter, it is imperative that I acknowledge this finding of a lack of well documented hopeful/different alternative approaches to North-South mobility encounters as this is what drives much of this research, before laying out the literature below. As I have mentioned, this literature review seeks to weave together conversations that are taking place in two of the most prominent forms of North-South mobility encounters in higher education: international service learning and study abroad. I will briefly outline some of the                                                  3 For context, Tiessen and Grantham (2017) present evidence that shows that ninety seven percent of  universities in Canada alone offer international experiences and they document how an increasing number of these are offered in the Global South.  4 “The “Global South” is a contested term but is used here to describe the countries that have low overall Gross National Product (GNP) and are defined by the Human Development Index (HDI) as low-income nations where human development indicators are weak, reflected in high levels of inequality, poverty and insecurity. The term “Global South” is employed to reinforce the challenge of separating countries into “haves” and “have-nots” or rich and poor, since there is also immense inequality within countries. In other words, one can find elements of the “North” (a short-hand for economic prosperity and higher levels of social equality) in the “Global South” just as one will find elements of the “South” (a short-hand for poverty, inequality, insecurity) within the Global North” (Tiessen & Grantham, 2017).  - 8 -  ongoing conversations in these scholarly fields to situate the tensions inherent in both ISL and Study Abroad in fostering global justice literacy from which this study emerges.   Introduction to International Service Learning Service learning has become an increasingly popular component of higher education, especially within faculties of education (McClam, Diambra, Burton, Fuss, & Fudge, 2008; Prentice & Garcia, 2000; LaMaster, 2001; Crabtree, 2008; Bringle, Hatcher & Jones, 2011).While service learning is a broad term that encompasses many forms of learning, and is known by many other names (e.g. community-based learning, community service learning, community engaged learning), the definition I have chosen defines service learning as a pedagogical approach that brings together community service with in-class preparation and reflection (Bruce & Brown, 2010, p.1). Service learning is increasingly seen as a ‘pedagogy that is suited to prepare college graduates to be active global citizens in the 21st century’ (Bringle & Hatcher, 2011). Bringle & Hatcher (2011) justify this statement by claiming that international service learning is a pedagogical approach associated with educational outcomes that are extensive, robust, transformational (producing “deep, permanent changes in present and future lives”) and distinctive” (p.3). However, service learning is widely and differently interpreted (Bringle, Hatcher & Jones, 2011; Billig & Waterman, 2012), thus it is important to note that the extent to which service learning achieves these educational outcomes is dependent on the approach to service learning. Approaches to service learning can be characterised as traditional, critical, and post-critical, as distinguished by Mitchell (2008) and Bruce (2013). Although these distinctions are not widely used in the literature on service learning, I use them here to categorize and make sense of the breadth of literature pertaining to service learning given its diverse theoretical orientations and resulting practical implications.   In traditional service learning, the desired outcomes are typically oriented around individual change and student development (Astin & Sax, 1998, p.255; Strage, 2004). Traditional service learning emphasizes the development of qualities, competencies and skills that individuals can gain and use for future professional endeavours (McClam et al. 2008; Reynolds, 2005; LaMaster, 2001; Strage, 2004). As traditional service learning remains focused on the development of individual learners, particularly in their accumulation of pre-professional experiences, programs carried out in this model tend to obscure, or at least leave untouched, the  - 9 -  power differentials between server and served inherent in service learning programs (Mitchell, 2008, p.56). There is an undiscussed divide between the community and the learner. The community becomes the “‘problem’ to be fixed, where the learner is the ‘server’ and the community is the ‘recipient’ of help” (Chambers, 2009, p.88; Manley, Buffa, Dube & Reed, 2006). Although the community may benefit from having some basic needs addressed, the traditional service learning model does not often examine learners’ positions and their self understanding in the role of ‘helper’. As educational institutions increasingly partner with communities through service learning relationships, it is important to note that while traditional service learning is useful in terms of students’ opportunities to learn about a community different from their own, it does not question the reification of power or inequity that is reproduced through the “helping” relationship (Martin, 2015; McBride, Brav, Menon & Sherraden, 2006; Manley et al. 2006). For instance, working in a soup kitchen or a health clinic that services ‘underprivileged’ clients may allow students to gain new understandings of ‘difference’, but it does not often call into question how social systems we all participate in contribute to the circumstances that produce inequities (Mitchell, 2008; Robinson, 2000). The notion that the students from the educational institution are unquestionably in a position to help others creates a divide between those who are helping and those who are receiving help, it creates a distinct understanding of “us” and “them”. Students are not pushed to consider the conditions that place them in a position to help or dispense rights and its implication in the creation of the wrongs they want to `right` (Spivak, 2004). Traditional service learning is thus very much predicated on a charitable model of engagement. As scholars have shown (Bruce, Martin & Brown, 2010; Mitchell, 2008; Manley et al. 2006), learning becomes problematic where “charity” becomes the core component of the service learning program and curriculum without any promotion of critical self-reflexivity or an awareness of the role in which learners play in the systems that produce the very problems they are trying to solve. Critiques of traditional service learning such as the ones that I have described above are many and scholars have widely documented them (Brown, 2001; Butin, 2005; Cipolle, 2004; Marullo, 1999; Robinson, 2000; Walker, 2000, as cited in Mitchell, 2008, p.50; McBride et al. 2006; Manley et al. 2006). Why then does this model persist, if the inadequacy of a learning model that does not address the inherent power inequities of the service learning relationship is clear? Proponents of traditional service learning maintain that participating in service learning  - 10 -  with the intention of improving your resume, gaining intercultural experience and competencies, or even, simply, to feel good about yourself, are all legitimate reasons to participate in service learning (Mitchell, 2008). Therefore, they contend that to delve deeper into power dynamics and complicities is unnecessary as the act of service is, supposedly, inherently good (Mitchell, 2008; Marullo & Edwards, 2000). This rationale assumes that to act is better than not to act; those who can help should in the way that they see fit. The assumption that “as long as the hungry person is being fed or the homeless person is being sheltered” allows for the dismissal of the importance of one’s intentions in participating in service learning (Marullo & Edwards, 2000, p.910). This contributes to the common assumption that the community unquestionably benefits from the service learning relationship. This uncritical participation encourages participants to feel good about their work and their identity and this forecloses the possibility of encountering and dealing with ‘difficult knowledge5’. In doing so, it embraces a theory of change based in the realm of individual action without a serious consideration of the epistemological and ontological frames that have created the problem that these actions seek to address in the first place. In response to the critiques of traditional service learning, many scholars and practitioners have advocated for a critical service learning model which is foregrounded by a commitment to social justice in order to avoid reproducing unjust structures (Grain & Lund, 2017; Mitchell, 2008; Porfilio and Hickmann, 2011). Mitchell (2008) documents how the concept of critical service learning emerged from the writings of Rhoads (1997), Rice and Pollack (2000) and Rosenberger (2000) to indicate a transition to service learning experiences characterized by a social justice orientation. Marullo and Edwards argue that such an approach is necessary for “community service and educational outreach to solve our social problems” rather than simply addressing the symptoms of inequity (as the traditional charity based model is structured to do) (2000, p.899). Where traditional service learning glossed over systems of power (See Strage, 2004; McClam et al. 2008; Reynolds, 2005; LaMaster, 2001; Astin & Sax, 1998), critical service learning attempts to bring these issues to light to begin to question why there is a                                                  5 I elaborate on the relevance of this concept in the following section, but it is important to note here that it is understood as knowledge that potentially conflicts with one’s (conscious and unconscious) emotions, desires, understanding of self and of the world (Pitt and Britzman, 2003). Encountering and learning through difficult knowledge takes place in both the critical and post-critical approaches. In the critical approach, learners face difficult knowledge in ways that often suggest their mastery of complicity as a virtue signal that demonstrates their ability to acknowledge their privilege where others do not. As I show later on, when embraced by a post-critical approach, facing difficult knowledge has the potential to disrupt learners’ existential attachments to superiority, righteousness and arrogance without prompting inertia/paralysis.    - 11 -  need for “service” in the first place by integrating critical theory and critical pedagogy (Mitchell, 2008).   While some intended outcomes of critical service learning are similar to traditional service learning in that its focus is on changes in the participants’ perspectives and individual change, the critical model underscores these outcomes related to student development of various skills and qualities with the hope of implementing social change (Mitchell, 2008, 61). The desired outcomes are more focused on a political shift rather than an attainment of individual skills and competencies (Mitchell, 2008; Butin, 2006; Wade, 200).  In order for this commitment to social change and social justice to be enacted by service learning participants, critical service learning promotes self-reflection (as opposed to self-awareness- which might be encouraged in a traditional approach, or self-reflexivity6) as a key component of any programme working towards these goals (Bringle, Hatcher & Jones, 2011). Critical service learning is therefore an attempt to: foster a critical consciousness, allowing students to combine action and reflection in classroom and community to examine both the historical precedents of the social problems addressed in their service placements and the impact of their personal actions/inaction in maintaining and transforming those problems. (Mitchell, 2008, 54) The model is intended to respond to the critiques of traditional service learning and instead encourage students to engage in service learning with an emphasis on examining power imbalances and inequities inherent in the service learning experience and relationship in order to make social change (Mitchell 2008, Pompa, 2002; Butin, 2003; McMillan & Stanton, 2014; Cermak, Christiansen, Finnegan, Gleeson, White & Leach, 2011). Participants are encouraged to consider the imbalances in the service learning relationship that accrue around whose voices are heard or unheard, who makes the decisions as to what action should be taken, and who ultimately benefits from the experience (Butin, 2003).  Programmes that undertake the critical service learning model thus encourage learners to enact the positions of “agents of social change” and to use the service learning experience to reflect on and respond to inequities they observe during their experience (Mitchell, 2008, 51). The core difference between the two service learning                                                  6 See Andreotti, V. (2014). Critical and transnational literacies in international development and global citizenship education, SISYPHUS Journal of Education, 2(3): 32-50 for a relevant distinction between self-awareness, self-reflection and self-reflexivity.   - 12 -  models examined so far is that the traditional service learning model aims for “service to an individual” and the critical model aims for “service for an ideal”, this ideal being social justice (Wade, 2000, p.97).  Grain and Lund (2017) highlight: that a social justice turn has (only just) begun in the field of service-learning, led by critical scholars and pedagogues; if developed intentionally and robustly, this turn will keep the field relevant amid the divisive politics of our current times. Without the social justice turn and its continued bolstering, service learning, steeped in a history of White normativity and charity, risks becoming an outdated pedagogy; it could simply lapse into an approach that inadvertently exacerbates intolerance, leaves the heavy lifting to marginalized activists, and omits criticality in favor of naive hope. (p.46) While critical service learning addresses some of the critiques of traditional service learning by accounting for power imbalances and encouraging participants’ self-reflexivity and reflection, it continues to pursue social change through veins that may contribute to the very problem that it attempts to resist. Bruce and Brown argue that it is likely that through many critical service learning projects, “a neoliberal, Eurocentric agenda is unwittingly advanced” (2010, p.4). The server, in the relationship, is still acting on behalf of the served. Those in positions to serve are assumed to have ‘legitimate knowledge’ and capabilities to do so. This form of service learning is focused on ‘righting a wrong’ done to marginalized groups rather than working towards a transformation of broader systems, assumptions, relationships that maintain and perpetuate social inequities (Chambers, 2009, 90; Grusky, 2000). The epistemic and ontological assumptions that frame responsible action in light of any transformation emerging from a North to South mobility encounter characterized by a critical approach leave unquestioned the notions of ‘responsible action’ as “primarily about the capacity to perform the ‘correct’ or ‘best’ action in any anticipated future scenario” (Osberg, 2017, p. 6). The critical approach, therefore, has the potential to reinforce commitments to ways of knowing and being that reinforce learners’ notions that greater equity and inclusion can be achieved through ‘empowerment’, ‘dialogue’, ‘moral deliberation’ and ensuing ‘social action’. However, as Ellsworth (1989) articulates, these can also be interpreted as the reproduction of narratives “that perpetuate relations of domination” (p.298).     Beyond a critical service learning, there is movement in the field to re-conceptualize service learning to address the critiques that persist in the critical model. One such movement is  - 13 -  the growing literature surrounding the term `global service learning` as articulated predominantly by Hartman and Kiely (2014). They argue that while global service learning remains committed to student intercultural competence development, it focuses on “structural analysis tied to consideration of power, privilege, and hegemonic assumptions”, is immersive and “engages the critical global civic and moral imagination” (Kiely & Hartman, 2014). This does not sound radically different from the commitments outlined in the critical approach, and yet other scholars’ contributions to the ‘global service learning’ approach have pushed the boundaries further, demonstrating an emergence of theory and practices that is attempting to deepen the analysis and change the focus of the critical approach. Garcia and Longo (2014) highlight how a global focus “is more holistic and less linear—moving from location to ways of thinking, from nation-states to networks of relationships, and from divisions (international versus local) to interconnections” (p.114). Garcia and Longo thus see an ‘ecology of education’ as key to implementing a truly ‘global’ service learning that is premised on interconnection and interdependency.   Another similar move to go beyond the critical service learning model is an increasing call for service learning to be inverted and called ‘learning service’ in an attempt to emphasize the learning and de-emphasize the significance of the service in the educational encounter (Boyle-Baise, Brown, Hsu, Jones, Prakash, Rausch, Vitols & Wahlquist,  2006). McMillan & Stanton (2014) outline that `learning service` implies focusing on “oneself in service with others, on one’s service relationships and on the meaning of service itself” in order to effectively “teach when contexts are complex and extremely unequal”(p.66). McMillan & Stanton (2014) highlight the importance of facing the complexity of the relationships established in global service learning encounters and the importance power plays in and between them. The importance of facing complexity, uncertainty, discomfort and ambiguity are also foregrounded in Grain and Lund’s (2017) description of the social justice turn in service literature, indicating how their reading of the field and what is to come might be read as a transitional reorientation from the critical to something different. The emerging literature articulating learning service and global service learning fall under what Bruce distinguishes more explicitly as a post-critical service learning. In order to situate the emergence of a post-critical service learning within academic literature and contextualize its origins, I will briefly discuss the growing call for a post-critical  - 14 -  educational philosophy happening in educational circles that are wider than those delineated in the field of North to South mobility encounters, International Service Learning or Study Abroad. The term ‘post-critical’ has been used in philosophy by various authors and can be traced to Polyani’s ruminations on the concept in 1958. However, in relation to a post-critical educational philosophy or a post-critical approach to pedagogy, the term has more recently began to amass traction in the scholarly literature (see Hodgson, Vlieghe & Zamojski, 2017; Osberg, 2017; Bruce, 2013; Payne, 2016). Much of this work builds on the foundations of a post-critical approach to pedagogy laid by Ellsworth (1989) and Lather (1995).  Hodgson, Vlieghe and Zamojski (2017) have identified the “need to articulate a post-critical educational philosophy” due to what they outline as a standstill in critical pedagogy and educational research (p.1). While the ‘post’ in post-critical suggests something beyond or after critique, the shift to a post-critical pedagogy “by no means entails abandoning critique. A post-critical stance is not anticritical” (ibid. p.3). Hodgson et al. (2017) acknowledge that while a post-critical educational philosophy holds many similar convictions to that of a critical pedagogy philosophy, a post-critical approach views education as having intrinsic value without significant emphasis on external aims, while “in the perspective of critical pedagogy, education itself can play the role of a mere instrument for the desired political change” (ibid. p.3).  The impetus for educational transformation is therefore not an unmasking process or a revealing of unjust systems, structures, processes or institutions, but rather identifying and reorienting of desires and investments in them. Hodgson et al. (2017) elaborate, “we have no ground to believe that debunking reality - giving further proof of the wrongs inherent to the world- will make people change their actions, and therefore - will change the world itself” (p.11). While I disagree to the extent that I do think learning the history of how norms came to be and how modern subjectivities are structured is necessary, I agree with the notion that it is not more critique or acquisition of knowledge that is going to generate people’s disinvestment in ontological security and therefore it is important to experiment, pedagogically, with what (beyond more information, knowledge or understanding) might compel people to change.  Osberg (2017) claims that the discussions articulating a post-critical educational philosophy such as the one outlined by Hodgson et al. contribute to a reframing of the purpose of education and how it relates and contributes to the (desired/ideal) future. A post-critical educational philosophy, therefore, works to engage learners in imagining and creating futures  - 15 -  that are not emergent from descriptive and prescriptive means. Learners, involved in a post-critical pedagogy, are not made to realize the injustices of the world and then correct them accordingly but are encouraged to disinvest in attachments to certainty and solving that a critical pedagogy tends to reinforce. An alternative to a critical approach therefore does not mean doing away with critique, in favour of something new, but takes into consideration the epistemic and ontological assumptions that frame it. A post-critical educational philosophy is not acritical or driven by a desire to ignore historical and ongoing power relations or intentional and persistent inequity or our complicity in the systems we participate in and the injustices they produce. Rather, Osberg (2017) shows how this involves a repositioning of “education as an intervention that is concerned with something other than preparing for the future by merely overcoming the problems of an existing but deficient (and often despised) present” and how this is central to what she has articulated is an important and emerging discussion in educational research “about the possibility of a ‘post-critical educational philosophy’” (p. 6). A post-critical approach, therefore, opens the possibility for education to instill a non-normative responsibility (Osberg, 2017). My intention in highlighting some of the ongoing conversations and discussions in educational studies pertaining to a post-critical philosophy is not in order to choose which approach is best, but to provide the academic context in which to grapple with the questions that guide this research. These questions consider how education can encourage the identification and reorientation of cognitive, affective and relational investments in modern subjectivities without forgetting/ignoring the histories and violences that have constructed and continue to construct the economies in which they operate.  In other words, how education can “take account of the past at the same time that it addresses problematic patterns in the present and opens up new possibilities for the future” (Andreotti, 2014c, p. 388).  Rather than situating my research statically within one camp, I intend to explore the post-critical approach, its possibilities and challenges in order to expand the range of approaches that are currently available so that they can be used when and where appropriate. In the context of North to South mobility experiences, the term post-critical service learning is used almost exclusively in the recent service learning literature by Judy Bruce. Bruce writes that post-critical service learning is necessary for “the troubling of a critical pedagogical practice while being cognizant of the need to continue the social justice agenda” (2015, p.234). She identifies how a post-critical approach is different from that of a critical one by critiquing the  - 16 -  “projection of rightness” in critical service learning. Bruce argues that critical service learning is based upon “fixed normative ideas about justice...and serving and reinforcing binaries” (2015, p.234). While the limitations of traditional service learning and its potential to contribute to uncritical, ahistorical and universalizing relationships has been illustrated (Mitchell, 2008; Marullo & Edwards, 2000), post-critical scholars argue that such attention must also be paid to critical service learning as it is no less immune to this critique when built on the assumption of knowledge as fixed and certain, implying the existence of universal ideals of justice and equity and the persistence of binaries (Bruce, 2013, p. 819; Butin, 2003). While proponents of critical service learning have made significant developments in the field by attending to the need to instill desire for changing injustices for and with ‘Others’, that change has been predetermined and scripted, thus foreclosing possibilities for new and different meanings of transformation (Bruce, 2013, p.816). Bruce thus conceptualizes post-critical service learning as a response to these limitations of critical service learning while continuing to work towards the pursuit of global justice, and opening up the possibilities for a non-normative responsibility that is required to do so. A post-critical approach is therefore concerned with establishing ethical relationships within service learning that can only emerge through participants’ practices of humility, openness, engagement with complicity and assumptions (Bruce & Brown, 2010). A post-critical approach to service learning brings attention to the power relations between the server/helper and the recipient in a way that does not suggest the futility of service learning, rather, such an approach uses the encounter of service learning as an example of border crossing and a reminder that the server/helper is also complicit in the persistence of such borders (Butin, 2003). Bruce highlights how “traditional and critical humanistic perspectives...emphasize a scientific mode of knowledge produced by an objective, rational self that can provide universal truths about the world” (2013, p. 37). She illustrates how these practices remain grounded in epistemic certainty and thus do not question universal, teleological pursuits and notions of self and Other, nor what is knowable and/or unknowable. A post-critical approach is a pedagogical invitation to question and shift the ontological securities and comforts that ground the students and to begin to experiment without a complete investment in epistemic certainty.  These two terms, epistemic certainty and ontological security, are central to this research and specifically to a post-critical educational approach, and thus require some unpacking. Epistemic certainty is the belief that the world is knowable (and that the world is what it appears  - 17 -  to be (Kinnvall, 2004, p.745)). Ontological security stems from the reduction of being to thinking. Andreotti (2016) discusses how, in modernity, ontological security is premised on the “‘I think, therefore I am’ of autonomous, self-transparent, and dualistic Cartesian subjectivities” (p. 286), such as conscious and unconscious commitments (to logocentrism, universalism, anthropocentrism, teleological, dialectical, allochronic and dialectical thinking)7 (2016). Our8 taken-for-granted narratives and our affective investments and desires are shaped and determined by these subjectivities which, in modernity, have come to structure “a shared matrix of meanings and horizons of possibility” that grounds “our desires, investments, and identifications” within them (2016, Stein & Andreotti, p. 178). An investment in epistemic certainty and ontological security forecloses engaging with what is unimaginable or otherwise not-yet-possible in ways that do not necessary “follow logically from the known” (Osberg, 2017, p. 15). The way in which these concepts bear on the interpretation and analysis in this research is discussed further in my conceptual framework chapter (see p. 36). Engaging with epistemic certainty and ontological security in relation to cognitive, affective and relational justice, is imperative in pursuing a global justice literacy framework more broadly which might allow us to consider “the limits of the knowing and being we have been socialized into...as our imagination is restricted by our projective ontological referents, and our desires are allocated accordingly” (Andreotti, 2016b, p. 86). The justification for a post-critical, in response to a critical, model of service learning lies in its commitments to engaging with uncertainty and unpredictable ‘outcomes’ in the service learning experience by attempting to highlight ongoing implications and complicities and inviting participants to examine their desires, investments and assumptions in participating in service learning while challenging universal ideas of justice and epistemic universality. Grain and Lund (2017) convincingly document the turn that is occurring in higher education service learning, both practically and conceptually; however, I argue that this turn can mobilize service                                                  7 See Andreotti, V. (2016). Response: The difficulties and paradoxes of interrupting colonial totalitarian logicalities. Philosophy of Education Archive, 284-288 for a deeper discussion of these terms and subjectivities. Logocentrism is the belief “that reality can be described in language” (Andreotti, 2016, p.286); universalism is the understanding of one’s “interpretation of reality as objective and to project it as the only legitimate and valuable world view; anthropocentrism is reasoning that makes one see oneself “as separate from nature and having a mandate to manage, exploit and control it”; teleological thinking involves planning “for the engineering of a future that [one]...can already imagine]; dialectical thinking is an investment in “linear logic averse to paradoxes, complexities and contradictions”; allochronic and evolutionary thinking allow one to “judge others according to a timeline where one is “represented as being in the present of (linear) time while others are in the past” and, therefore, where one “leads humanity in a single path of evolution” (Andreotti, 2016, p.286).  8The ‘our’ I employ here refers to modern subjects.   - 18 -  learning that has the capacity to shift not (only) political commitments but cognitive, affective and relational ones. There is a balance that must be struck in any articulation and/or pursuit of a post-critical approach; there is a need to not remain stuck in only critique and thus do something differently, and yet, there is a need to resist the tendency to do something (anything!) to absolve oneself from critique which must also be worked against/around/through. I have outlined the different categories9 into which literature on service learning falls in order to show that the epistemological and ontological frames of each influence the nature of service learning theory and practice as well as their desired and resulting ‘outcomes’. Across each of these different categories of service learning is a constant link to the types of transformations that they (intend to) produce. As this literature seeks to explore the link between North-South mobility encounters and transformation, I will return to this relationship after a brief overview of the ongoing tensions in the Study Abroad field as well.    Introduction to Study Abroad While the distinctions in Study Abroad have yet to officially be characterized in the literature as traditional, critical, post-critical; the literature shows a growing and well supported critique of the mainstream or traditional approach and gestures towards what could be the equivalent of a post-critical Study Abroad; this is mostly seen in research investigating and exploring decolonial study abroad (Jorgenson, 2014; Wright, 2013). I outline some of the tensions in the Study Abroad literature and will then show how both Study Abroad and (Post-critical) Service Learning consider and strive for transformation and what implications this has on North-South mobility experiences.  While the selected case study had a service learning component, it can be more broadly characterized as a Study Abroad program and thus it is necessary for me to outline some of the recent literature surrounding study abroad. In doing so, I illuminate how my exploration of this case examines the potential for North-South mobility experiences to foster the types of educational transformations necessary for global justice literacy.  Both Study Abroad and ISL are informed by recent trends in the internationalization of higher education (Trilokekar and Rasmi, 2011a; Bringle & Hatcher, 2011) and are thus both subject to different and competing                                                  9 For a more visual summary of these differences, see the table included in Appendix J.   - 19 -  perspectives on the purposes, forms and potentials for transformation. While scholars (Wright, 2013; Biles & Lindley, 2009; Stein & Andreotti, 2016) have documented the corresponding trends in a rise in Study Abroad activities with the “broader experiences of marketization and commodification of education” (Wright, 2013, p.13), this subsection of the literature review is focused on summarising the strong field of critique regarding Study Abroad in order to begin to imagine how to move beyond critique.  Study Abroad, like service learning, is subject to various definitions, however, for the purpose of this thesis I employ Wright’s (2013, p.14) definition of Study Abroad as “the completion of educational experiences for academic credit in a different country in which the home campus is located”.  She elaborates that this form of study either occurs through direct enrolment, “where students take courses at a university alongside host country students, or in the form of an island program, where U.S. students complete courses that are specially designed for the study trip without any local student participation” (2013, p.14). The case I studied fell under the island designation and involved American students completing for credit courses in social innovation, community development, community action and Portuguese language. SIT is essentially a third party provider of the study abroad experience and thus the students who took part were from a variety of institutions. Study Abroad, again, like Service Learning, is continuing to grow as a component of various higher education programs (Wright, 2013; Altbach and Teicher, 2001). In fact, Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich (2015), demonstrate how UNESCO statistics point to the fact that we “are now living in an unprecedented era of study abroad” (p.41). Higher education institutions continue to incorporate, integrate and offer Study Abroad to a wide range of students and thus this context of expansion informs the urgency of the research at hand.  The benefits of Study Abroad programs as presented in mainstream discourse often include “the development of ‘global awareness and knowledge’, ‘intercultural competencies’ and ‘global citizenship’ , as a means to improve students’ employability and prepare them for the demands placed on today’s global workforce” (Wright, 2013, p.16). This type of rhetoric aligns with the traditional conception of service learning that I have outlined above.  Much research has focused on how Study Abroad programs afford participants access to experiential learning and the development of intercultural skills (Golay, 2006; Clarke, Flaherty, Wright, & McMillen, 2009). While the learning outcomes (in some conceptualizations) of service learning are often  - 20 -  considered in relation to the community the learner is engaging with, Bringle, Hatcher & Jones (2011) make the distinction that in Study Abroad the rationale for engagement revolves around the student who stands to benefit through the attainment of intercultural, language, and communication skills. Vande Berg, Paige & Lou (2012) highlight how Study Abroad continues to grow as a trend in higher education in the US and globally. They show how evidence documenting the success of learning through study abroad has typically relied on “the increasing number of students that individual colleges and universities...annually send abroad” and the anecdotal evidence from students that convey how the experience led to transformation. Vande Berg, Paige & Lou (2012) highlight the ongoing paradigm shift in Study Abroad that they argue has moved from a positivist to a relativist to a (current) experiential understanding of learning and knowledge. The emphasis on Study Abroad as an avenue through which to employ experiential education is echoed in Lutterman-Aguilar and Gingerich`s (2015) thorough review of Study Abroad as a pedagogy for educating for global citizenship. They highlight how Study Abroad is currently used educationally “to help students understand our interconnectedness and to help weave a garment of global awareness and mutuality by building international bridges of understanding” and “seeks to promote global understanding in a multicultural world” with the goal of “developing non-exploitative relationships between people of different cultures and the reality of dominance within nearly every nation on earth”. Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich (2015) elaborate on how they view study abroad as “one of the best tools for developing mutual understanding and building connections between people from different countries”, primarily due to its ability to enhance the “affective nature of experiential learning”. While this potential for affective change provoked by North-South mobility experiences drives (in part) the impetus for this research; it is important to distinguish that while Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich note that the affective nature of experiential learning can lead to self-discovery and personal mastery, it is a move away from mastery that a post-critical approach would seek to implement. In this experiential paradigm of Study Abroad, which appears to be emerging in some of the more recent literature (Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich, 2015; Vande Berg, Paige & Lou, 2012), Study Abroad programs are beginning to “define the success of their programs by the extent to which students are immersed in the host culture and develop positive relationships with individuals in the host country”. The Study Abroad literature not only documents a shift towards an emphasis of the experiential, it also gives voice to the recent (and much needed) attention to the inequities  - 21 -  that Study Abroad programs perpetuate (Angod, 2015; Pluim & Jorgenson, 2012; Zemach-Bersin, 2007). As Jorgenson articulates, recognizing “the lack of mutuality in these exchanges in terms of people and knowledge, a call to problematize the notion that international programs have the right to enter and intervene (predominantly on the Northerner’s terms) in Southern contexts has begun” (2014, p.43). I will briefly outline what this call has brought forth. Zemach-Bersin (2007), for example, highlights how despite study abroad’s association with improving global awareness and lessening cross-cultural misunderstandings or prejudice, scholars often overlook how “the current discourse of study abroad is nationalistic, imperialist, and political in nature”. Pluim and Jorgenson (2012) continue to explore how Study Abroad programmes are a reproduction of colonial relations through their tendency to reinforce dominant values and “a superiority-inferiority binary”. They consider if it is possible “that the harm incurred by these programmes might outweigh the good? And if this is the case, what do we, as Canadian participants, practitioners and policy-makers, do about it?” (Pluim & Jorgenson, 2012, p.25). As well, Stein, Andreotti, Susa and Bruce summarize that (from a critical or ‘anti-oppression’ standpoint) study abroad experiences “are critiqued for potentially exploitive or disruptive for host communities (Jefferess, 2012); promoting an elitist and exclusionary cosmopolitanism (Rizvi, 2008); and perpetuating Western students’ feelings of universal entitlement (Zemach-Bersin, 2007)” and “for forestalling students’ interrogation of how their own positions within the highly uneven and racialized global political economy contribute to the very harm they have supposedly travelled abroad to address (Andreotti, 2011; Bryan, 2013; Heron, 2007; Jefferess, 2012)” (2016, p.8). Pluim and Jorgenson (2012) highlight how a thorough post-colonial critique of Study Abroad does seem to suggest that the appropriate response in light of the neocolonial tendencies would be to halt Study Abroad programs, a suggestion that other post-colonial analyses have touched on as well (Angod, 2015; Zemach-Bersin, 2007). However, Pluim and Jorgenson (2012) continue to state that “not only unlikely, this solution ultimately throws the proverbial baby out with the bathwater” as Study Abroad programmes do have the potential for new approaches to intercultural and interdependent relationships (p.32). In order for Study Abroad programs to disrupt hierarchical narratives and relationships in the pursuit of global justice literacy, we need  - 22 -  to document where the potential for fostering a transformation that might allow for these relationships and re-orientations towards global justice literacy might lie.  Epprecht (2004) illustrates how North-South mobility programmes are “so obviously a powerful and attractive method of teaching about the complexities and challenges of development that it is tempting to assume that the benefits automatically outweigh the risks” (p.704). While Epprecht outlines some of the ethical and neocolonial risks of study abroad programmes, no matter how well thought out or well intentioned, he admits that “on the other hand, to acknowledge the risks is to invite doubt” and that “the task, therefore, is to find a balance between presumption (of intrinsic good) and pre-occupation (with risks)” (p.704). I tend to agree and it is within this paradox that this scholarly work aims to lodge itself. While aware of the rigorous post-colonial (and other) critiques of study abroad, this thesis is the result of my persistent effort to disrupt the dominant approach and to uncover what possibilities a post-critical approach might open up in this field.  Thus, the literature’s increasing capabilities for problematizing North-South mobility experiences has led to a call for study abroad programs to focus on developing students’ engagement with their complicity in the local and global systems in which they participate (knowingly and unknowingly) and a desire to embed in such encounters a de-centring of the western experience and western knowledge/values. Therefore, in conjunction with the critiques highlighted above, it is important in light of the rising trends in study abroad and service learning, and North to South mobility education more generally, to engage in research that outlines what is possible in these interactions and to document the moments that hold potential for an education that is committed to a transformation that might engender global justice (literacy).    Transformation Most proponents of service learning and study abroad, in different ways, link the experience of service learning programmes to a corresponding transformation in the participants (Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich, 2015; McMillan & Stanton, 2012; Kiely, 2004; Rhoads, 1997). As outlined in the earlier subsections of this literature review, Bruce (2013 makes a distinction between traditional, critical and post-critical service learning (see also Stein, Andreotti, Bruce, Susa, 2016); proponents of each approach, in different ways, link the experience of service  - 23 -  learning programmes to a corresponding transformation in the participants. What constitutes ‘transformation’, how participants express it, and how practitioners can measure it are all issues of contention in the service learning literature. Scholars conducting empirical studies of service learning have noted the universal yet ambiguous link between the concepts of transformation and service learning (Kiely, 2004; Rhoads, 1997; Eyler and Giles, 1999). They have also documented that transformation is not inevitable or even frequent amongst service learning participants (Kiely, 2004; Rhoads, 1997; Eyler and Giles, 1999). I use the distinct divisions in the service learning approaches to demonstrate a shifting understanding of what transformation is desired and how it is achieved. I then follow this with an examination of the link between study abroad and transformation in order to demonstrate the narratives framing the specific North-South mobility encounter and its relationship to transformation that structure the context of this study.  In order to do so, I must first make clear the intentional choice to discuss ‘transformation’ but not ‘transformative learning’ in this thesis. I have intentionally used the term ‘transformation’ as opposed to ‘transformative learning’ throughout this thesis in order to put forward the conception of transformation through pedagogical encounters that a post-critical approach might align with, without being tied to the ‘transformative learning’ literature which is widely available in educational research and also widely critiqued and embroiled in debate. I recognize that not including this general literature on transformative learning and instead focusing on the transformation I am proposing as a shift in attachments to epistemic and ontological certainty and security might be a limitation of my research. However, I find that this limitation is a necessary one in retaining the appropriate scope for this text.    Transformation in traditional service learning is sometimes understood as the development of new skills, confidence, increased awareness about the world or increased empathy (Kiely, 2004). Transformation, in this model, is often conceptualized as the production of students who are “more tolerant, altruistic and culturally aware; who have stronger leadership and communication skills” (Mitchell, 2008, p. 50). Coordinators and participants of service learning programmes often assume that traditional service learning is automatically transformative for the individuals that take part. while post-trip evaluations of student journals in Kiely’s 2004 study indicate that students self-identify as having been transformed by their service learning experience, the extent to which their transformation is evident in changes to their lifestyle habits or social action is often “ambiguous and problematic” (Kiely, 2004, p. 5). In  - 24 -  Kiely’s recent study (2004), he also builds on Rhoads’ (1997) study that suggests that students who “experienced perspective transformation began to develop a more critical and caring self, one that [...]identifies with the poor and intends to advocate on their behalf”. However, Rhoads’ (1997) study also shows that “most students continue to see the world through the lens of charity or as ‘do-gooders’” (Kiely, 2004, p. 7). This demonstrates the persistence of a ‘feel good’ and charitable approach to service learning that leaves intact the power imbalances that characterize such relationships. Rhoads’ (1997) study, among others, highlights how perspective transformation is not inevitable or even frequent amongst student participants. He suggests that what often contributes to perspective transformation was a service learning programme that intentionally integrated and drew upon a social justice pedagogy (Rhoads, 1997). It is thus important to discern, in the following section, how the critical service learning approach takes up the question of transformation, if, as Kiely suggests, transformation is not automatic upon participation. Transformation in the critical service learning approach is understood as following a linear development from notions of charity to pursuing social change. This assumption of perspective transformation is rendered problematic by Kiely’s Chameleon Complex study which demonstrates how students often “struggle to translate their perspective transformation into meaningful action” (Kiely, 2004 p. 16). As a result, they sometimes choose to revert back to comfort and conformity. The findings from Kiely’s study suggest that a transformation in one’s worldview is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for changing lifestyles, challenging mainstream norms, and engaging in collective action to transform existing social and political institutions (Kiely, 2004). This demonstrates how a commitment to social justice is a necessary component of any service learning program that aims for transformative learning, however, it is not sufficient. This is where a post-critical service learning comes in.  The pursuit of individual transformation in the traditional service learning model, and even the critical model, is bound up with the assumption that transformation is uniformly positive (Astin &Sax, 1998), whether for the skills and competencies of the individual or for social change. Scholars have recently brought attention to how critical approaches often focus on critique and the ability to “judge social arrangements in order to recognize and rectify social injury” and they argue that it is this act of critique and judgement that forecloses learners’ abilities to recognize their entanglement with others (Gaztambide Fernandez, 2011, p. 326;  - 25 -  Kennedy, 2015). Post-critical service learning opens up a space for transformations to be engaged with that are not necessarily positive but rather disruptive, troubling, and often disturbing. The political transformation involved in identifying socially and historically constructed scripts of identity and institutions and an understanding of how our relationship to each other are mediated by knowledge and identity is necessary, but not sufficient for establishing non-normative responsible relationships in the service learning context. A post-critical transformation would be an attempt to operate beyond these scripts and to center our interdependence in a way we cannot turn away from which would require an ontological shift that recognizes relationality with self, others, knowledge and the world in new ways (Andreotti, 2016). This transformation is not merely learning about something one hadn’t thought about before. It requires that participants question what they have taken for granted in the sense that they question what they thought was normal, what they thought it meant to ‘be good’ and to do ‘good work’, what they were comfortable with that they can no longer feel comfortable with.  The type of transformation that a post-critical approach seeks to engender is therefore one which shifts dispositions10 of engagement with ideas and investments in sense of self, knowledge of others, and relationships to others. A post-critical approach has the potential to encourage learners to question and consider their cognitive, affective and relational investments. This understanding of transformation is therefore not associated with learning that aims for acquisition of knowledge skills or attitudes but instead centers how students engage with knowledge and their ways of being in the world. This transformation would allow one to see the limitations of not considering other ways of knowing, being, and relating, and to instill in the participant a need to try something different, expanding the possibilities of seeing, knowing, being and experimenting with something different than what has so far structured their existence. As McMillan and Stanton (2014), drawing on Barnett and Coates, illustrate, ...it is the domain of being that...is the significant area where curriculum change ought to happen for contemporary times- times of ongoing uncertainty and ‘supercomplexity’: the way forward lies in construing and enacting a pedagogy for human being. In other words,                                                  10Barnett (2009) explains dispositions as: “those tendencies of human beings to engage in some way with the world around them” (p. 433). He elaborates that: “dispositions form human beings in a fundamental way. They provide the modes in which human beings each take up intentional stances towards the world. They supply the possibilities for going forward, for engaging with the world. They generate a dynamic relationship between human beings and the world...Through their dispositions, human beings orient themselves to, and engage with, the world in particular ways. Through their dispositions, human beings take on human being as such”. (p. 434)   - 26 -  learning for an unknown future has to be a learning understood neither in terms of knowledge or skills but of human qualities and dispositions. Learning for an unknown future calls, in short, for an ontological turn. (p. 67) If traditional service learning sees transformation as individual knowledge acquisition premised on epistemological certainty, and critical service learning sees transformation as an acknowledgement of hierarchies of epistemic dominance from a continued attachment to epistemic certainty, post-critical service learning operates in a domain that provokes epistemic (and potentially ontological) uncertainty and/or openness. The need for a service learning that faces the uncertainty of current times is clear and the shift away from possible outcomes perceived as skills to dispositions is an important distinction. Upon outlining the various approaches to service learning frame transformation, I will briefly illustrate the link between transformation and study abroad.  In the Study Abroad literature, students are expected to learn about a country and culture that is not their own, and are often expected to develop language skills as well as a more “global worldview...and global understanding” (Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich, 2015). Study Abroad has been widely understood as an educational encounter that could lead to positive social transformation based on a growing global awareness and mindedness. In 1974, UNESCO produced the Recommendation Concerning Education for International Understanding, Co-operation and Peace and Education relating to Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms” which outlined the desired outcomes of  international education as individual development of social responsibility, solidarity and critical thinking for international co-operation (UNESCO, 1974, p. 148). These individual qualities and abilities reflect a similar understanding of the transformation possible in study abroad experiences as in traditional and critical service learning: the development of individual competencies, skills and qualities for personal development and social justice, respectively. Vande Berg, Paige & Lou (2012) state that “not all faculty and staff are convinced, however, that most students are more or less automatically gaining the sorts of knowledge, perspectives and skills that are important for living and working in a global society, merely through being exposed to the new and different in another country” (p. 2). Like critics of the automatic transformation sometimes espoused as occurring as a result of service learning, scholars and practitioners of Study Abroad programs are increasingly questioning the assumption that simply by being in a foreign environment students are likely to transform beliefs or  - 27 -  worldviews. Bringle, Hatcher & Jones (2011) state that “Study abroad can too easily be viewed as an activity that is ‘good for its own sake’ without regard to clarifying and analyzing why it is good and in what ways it is beneficial for participants”.  While Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich (2015) agree that “study abroad in and of itself does not lead to the development of global citizenship...it can do so when it is designed with that goal in mind”. In order for the desired goal of increased global citizenship on the part of students participating in Study Abroad to avoid reproducing relationships characterized by exploitation, Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich (2015) recognize that “educators need to be prepared to help students become open to new ways of learning” (p. 72). While the authors do not delve into what exactly these new ways of learning might look like in theory or practice, they open a door in the scholarship for us to consider what pedagogical frameworks and approaches might best encourage students to engage with uncertainty and unpredictable outcomes in the learning experience, while remaining attentive and accountable to historical and ongoing global inequities.   A post-critical approach to transformation as identified in the emergence of post-critical service learning can be applied and useful to study abroad and more broadly North-South mobility experiences. I am interested in the possibilities for a form of post-critical service learning in practice that might begin to deal with and encourage learners to cope with their attachments to epistemic certainty and ontological security as an element of the transformative component of their North-South mobility experience. My approach affirms the potential for North to South mobility experiences to create possibilities for transformation, yet denies the association of such transformation with outcomes related simply to professional development or cultural awareness. Instead, the question becomes, how will a post-critical approach lead to new understandings of transformation in the service learning field? What (pedagogical) contributions and educational resources are needed to embrace a post-critical approach?  These questions are kept at the forefront of my research, although this thesis ultimately focuses on a specific case study and attends to highly specific research questions. Himley notes that despite the critiques of service learning and the debates about the ‘right’ way to do it, she does not intend to abandon service learning altogether “because it is one of the few places where we encounter one another in ways that may disrupt the production of the stranger” (2004, 433). The generative potential that service learning as an educational encounter has to disrupt one’s assumptions is core to my exploration of post-critical approaches to service learning in the hopes of finding not solutions,  - 28 -  but possible ways to provoke more ethical relationships within the practice and widen the possibility for education to provoke a non-normative responsibility. Wright (2013) stated that scholars writing about North to South student mobility experiences have “tended to centre on the negative aspects associated with this phenomenon. Their work helps to map the neocolonial tendencies often present within N-S study experiences, although they rely predominantly on discursive and visual analysis of the field of study abroad” (p.20). While this discursive analysis brings to light the ways in which North to South mobility experience in higher education tend to reproduce patterns of oppression, inequity and exploitation (not to be thought of lightly), there is also a need to then develop “more theoretically informed practical tools, frameworks, and resources for prompting and fostering ethical local and global engagements among practitioners and students alike” (Stein, 2017, p.221). This literature review (although multi-purpose) is guided by the central aim of highlighting the need for documenting, theorizing, and experimenting with practical tools, frameworks and resources. This study responds to this need identified in the literature by exploring a case that attempts to do just that in an in-depth manner.     - 29 -  Chapter 3: Conceptual Framework:  The conceptual framework that informs this research is a bricolage, the roots of which I will trace and give credit to in this chapter11. There are bodies of knowledge which I have learned from deeply in my research, and yet do not feel that this piece of work quite exemplifies yet. For example, I am inspired by pursuits in theory and practice of decolonial education, but feel disingenuous attempting to argue that this research is decolonial as it is so deeply rooted in a colonial project. Perhaps, however, it embraces theory and frameworks necessary for a decolonial approach in this field, while acknowledging the gaps and distance between exercising such an approach and mainstream North-South mobility experiences currently available in higher education institutions. While attempting to gesture towards the possibilities of a decolonial education in this field, colonial investments may still be present in my work here as a result of my own ongoing complicities in the systems I benefit from, the difficulties of conducting academic work that does not reproduce colonial patterns, and the nature of decolonization as an ongoing/lifelong process. I take the position that we are facing previously inconceivable complexity and uncertainty as a result of our increasingly globalized and interconnected world (Andreotti, 2006; Gaztambide-Fernandez, 2012; Kennedy, 2015; Burman, 2017). I use the word ‘facing’ intentionally because it is only in learning to confront and cope with this complexity and uncertainty by facing it head on rather than turning away, denying or ignoring it can we begin to engage deeply with other ways of relating to ourselves, to ‘others’ and to knowledge. Stein (2017) discusses the historical and ongoing impacts of “earlier efforts to engineer human progress and guarantee certain outcomes”, much of which has been characterized by attachments to “(the illusions of) security, control and our own innocence” (p.229). She adds: If we do not find a way to interrupt these cycles and reorient our desires toward different horizons, we may lose the opportunity to nurture other kinds of relations, learn with other ways of knowing, and imagine other worlds than the one we have inherited. (Stein, 2017, p. 230)                                                  11 While I would like to discuss global citizenship, development education, decolonial education, models of fair trade study abroad and a wider conversation about internationalization of higher education as each of these fields has informed my learning and this research, to do so opens me up to a whole other scope of a research project. So, while these fields are relevant, I leave them relatively untouched in the context of this thesis, unfortunately.   - 30 -  This inability to imagine other worlds than the one we have inherited is an educational disservice to future generations and an intellectual and existential defeat. This research is guided by an inquiry into how North-South mobility experiences in higher education (although highly prone to reproducing colonial patterns and subjectivities) might foster other generative transformations. Gaztambide Fernandez (2012) writes that in the context of globalization and its tendency to reinforce colonial modes of relation, “educators are called upon to play a central role in constructing the conditions for a different kind of encounter, an encounter that both opposes ongoing colonization and that seeks to heal the social, cultural, and spiritual ravages of colonial history”(p.42).  The transformation that I have outlined as a possibility stemming from a post-critical approach is key in any effort to foster global justice literacy, which is needed if educators are going to answer this call. The term ‘global justice’ is widely used and interpreted, and as Stein (2017) notes, is often “premised on different ideas and imaginaries of social change” (p. 222). Specifically, she finds “that liberal frames of global justice tend to predominate in internationalization scholarship” (Stein, 2017, p.222), and I would extend this predominance to the field of international education more widely. While the concept of global justice literacy can be traced to Spivak, I draw on Stein’s (2017) articulation of global justice literacy as the use of pedagogical methods or theoretical concepts that “prepare people to engage the complexity, uncertainty, and plurality of the world” (p.222). This current context of supercomplexity and uncertainty requires new pedagogy and education that might allow people to imagine different alternatives. In order to be transformed in a way that opens one up to these possibilities and the ability to embrace new modes of relating (to self, others and knowledge), North-South mobility experiences need to embrace a pursuit of cognitive, relational and affective justice. The possibility for a global justice literacy that emerges from a post-critical transformation that integrates cognitive, relational and affective justice lies in the potential for a North-South mobility experience to provoke a shift in how learners relate to themselves, others and knowledge. In contemplating the roles of multiple planes of justice in a global justice literacy framework, I draw on and am inspired by the work being done in the Earth CARE Intergenerational Justice Educational Community, an international network of 20 community-based educational centres in which educational leaders offer learning experiences for change- - 31 -  makers that integrate ecological, cognitive, affective, relational, economic and intergenerational approaches to justice (Andreotti, in press). This coalition is committed to developing social innovations that alleviate the effects and transform the root causes of material and existential forms of poverty (ibid). These educational centres are committed to on-the-ground work that goes beyond mere critique of the systems in which we participate and are actively working with ‘alternatives’ in new ways. As Stein et al. (2017) articulate: the “present moment is characterized by widespread political and economic instability and uncertainty about the future...even if there is agreement about the growing insufficiency of old frames of reference, there is significant disagreement about what the new frames should or could be” (p.3). If the dominant models of North-South mobility experiences are characterized by old frames of reference (as the growing literature critiquing them suggests), what potential do these educational spaces hold for educating with a commitment to the forms of justice outlined above? While I am intrigued and interested in all aspects, I will consider predominantly cognitive, relational and affective justice in my research below. Cognitive Justice Sousa Santos (2007) states that “there is no global social justice without global cognitive justice. This means that the critical task ahead cannot be limited to generating alternatives. Indeed, it requires an alternative thinking of alternatives” (p.42). This statement foregrounds much of the conceptual framework that supports this research and requires a detailed breakdown of several key terms and an explanation as to how they inform my research.  Cognitive justice “asserts the diversity of knowledge and equality of knowers (Visvanathan, 2000), [and] also provides a lens for looking at the inequities being created and reproduced through some discourses and practices of internationalization and global citizenship” (Jorgenson, 2014, p.60). As Jorgenson (2014) articulates:  Cognitive justice...is based on the reciprocal valorization of knowledges. This does not suggest that all knowledges are equally valid, but rather that an inclusive and equitable platform needs to be constructed before deliberation between various knowledges, values, and beliefs can occur. Cognitive justice is not a justification for abandoning critical inquiry, but a call for a democratic pluralist understanding (van der Velden, 2006)...In practice, cognitive justice interrogates  the hegemonic epistemologies and practices of  - 32 -  neoliberal globalization and opens space for the ‘revalorization of diverse knowledge systems’. (p.60) To reiterate, Burman (2017) summarizes how epistemic violence, a core component of colonial violence,  outlived colonialism and provides the rationale and justification for the privilege and dominance of Eurocentric systems of knowledge in relation to other ways of knowing the world. Thus, the coloniality of knowledge did not evaporate from the world-system when the former colonies liberated themselves. Cognitive justice, in the sense of epistemic justice, is therefore a pending task that, according to Santos, starts "from the premise that the epistemological diversity of the world is immense, as immense as its cultural diversity and that the recognition of such diversity must be at the core of the global resistance against capitalism and of the formulation of alternative forms of sociability. (Santos, Arriscado Nunes and Meneses 2007: ixx)  Essentially, this concept affirms the rights of multiple knowledges (one of which is modern science) to exist simultaneously in plurality (Sousa Santos, 2007). The struggle to achieve global cognitive justice requires the development and practice of an ecology of knowledges (ibid). The recognition of the dominance and persistence of one way of thinking is the prerequisite to begin to think and/or act differently (ibid). Cognitive justice would embrace the pursuit of inter-knowledge which entails “learning other knowledges without forgetting one’s own” (Sousa Santos, 2007).  To work towards global cognitive justice (or other forms of justice) can be difficult and uncomfortable, but this does not mean it should therefore be avoided. I am preoccupied with the notion of transformation in North-South mobility experiences because there is so much potential for discomfort and the encountering of previously unimaginable knowledge(s). However, these educational experiences present an opportunity to not become stuck in the discomfort, rather moving through it to new understandings and relationships to oneself, others and knowledge. Braidotti (2012) sums it up nicely: Transformative projects involve a radical repositioning on the part of the knowing subject which is neither self-evident nor free of pain...Yet it is necessary to counteract the spurious and perverse mode of planetary interconnection engendered by our global condition...Change is certainly a painful process, but this does not warrant the politically  - 33 -  conservative position that chastises all change as dangerous. The point in stressing the difficulties and pain involved in the quest for transformative processes is rather to raise an awareness of both the complexities involved and the paradoxes that lie in share. (p.219)  This notion that transformative projects in the pursuit of global cognitive justice that might foster a sense of interconnection may not be pain-free is an essential component of a post-critical approach wherein participants are encouraged to face rather than turn away from the discomfort that they encounter. Opening up to questioning one’s worldviews and “the ontological and epistemological foundations underlying these [so] that we can begin to learn to unlearn… can create a sense of discomfort and has implications for pedagogy” (Martin & Griffiths, 2012).  Shifting away from an education that is reaffirming and has prescribed outcomes and moving towards one that might be uncomfortable or painful is required if a post-critical approach is to be embraced. To summarise, I draw on Sousa Santos’ call for global cognitive justice to explore the potential in widely popular and increasingly ubiquitous North to South mobility educational experiences to foster the conditions for global cognitive justice.   Relational Justice  According to Burman (2017), “cognitive justice, as developed by Santos, is a concept concerned primarily with epistemology, i.e. with knowledge” and he argues that “epistemological issues tend to be discussed as though they were disembedded from their ontological contexts”. In order to work towards global justice literacy, pursuit of cognitive justice is required but not sufficient. In the context of North to South mobility experiences and their potential to provoke transformations that might result in global justice literacy, a pursuit of relational justice is also necessary. Andreotti (2017) details how this requires “dismantling divisions caused by inherited social, cultural, economic and epistemological hierarchies that hinder symmetrical relationships”. Gaztambide-Fernandez reiterates the importance of considering pedagogically “how to enter into ethical relationships that don’t simply ignore the ‘inherited social categories that shape the conditions of our lives’” (2011, p. 323). If North-South mobility experiences are to take a post-critical approach to transformation and explore the possibilities of developing and sustaining encounters and relationships not based on superiority, helping, or righteousness, those relationships will need to be guided by something else, and I  - 34 -  argue that that something else is relational justice. Rather than learning about hierarchies that have historically characterized North-South relationships, there is a need to “move beyond curriculum (as either knowledge or experience) to a focus on relationship, which might be better understood as a form of pedagogy” (Gaztambide-Fernandez, 2011, p.326). This move towards emphasizing the relationships rather than the outcomes of North-South mobility experiences is growing in the literature, and is accompanied by a call for a consideration of the ontological dimension in these very experiences. McMillan & Stanton (2014) demonstrate that “learning in complex unfamiliar contexts…[like those in which service learning and study abroad take place]...is not just about knowledge and action - or knowledge and doing. It is crucially about being as well” (p.66). A consideration of an ontological project is required in order for the learning about and through relationships between self, other, and knowledge to go beyond a mere intellectual engagement with what North-South mobility experiences have to offer. Global justice literacy (which is required for learning for an unknown future) therefore requires not just cognitive but relational and affective justice in order to explore both epistemic and ontological uncertainty as a potential ‘outcome’ of the transformation generated by a post-critical approach.   Affective Justice According to Andreotti (in press), affective justice requires “recognizing our collective need for healing from historical and intergenerational trauma, [and] prioritizing collective well-being”. In the literature review, I briefly hinted at the role of ‘difficult knowledge’ in both critical and post-critical approaches to service learning and transformation in North-South mobility experiences more broadly. Difficult knowledge is a term most widely theorized by Pitt and Britzman (2003) which is understood as knowledge that potentially conflicts with one’s (conscious and unconscious) emotions, desires, understanding of self and of the world. Britzman and Pitt elaborate that difficult knowledge demonstrates the “problem of learning from social breakdowns in ways that might open teachers and students to their present ethical obligations” (Britzman & Pitt, 2003). Transformation can therefore be encouraged by supporting learners in focusing on learning from rather than learning about the inequities and exploitation in relationships in which they participate (Taylor, 2012, p.190). Taylor argues that learning from difficult knowledge both disrupts and destabilizes and “sets the learning self in motion within an intimate process of becoming” (Taylor, 2012, p.190). In a critical approach, students face  - 35 -  difficult knowledge in ways that often suggest their mastery of their complicity and ability to be more virtuous than those who have yet to acknowledge their privilege.  When embraced by a post-critical approach, facing difficult knowledge has the potential to disrupt the narratives that inform students’12 attachments to their self-image and subsequent understanding of their role in social change without prompting inertia or paralysis. Zembylas’ (2015) theorizing on difficult knowledge adds nuance to its links to affective justice and how it can pedagogically result in “having to tolerate the loss of certainty in the very effort to know” (Farley, 2009, p.543). He outlines how difficult knowledge often involves uncertainty and disruption, and that those are, in fact, necessary in the pursuit of affective justice. Pedagogies that embrace difficult knowledge must also respond to “the inadequacies and uncertainties of learners’ responses as well as the loss of mastery and hope” (2015, p.396). Much of the scholarship on affect thus deals with notions of loss- of sense of self, of historical narratives, etc. and thus in reorienting desires towards new and different identities and aspirations, a pedagogy that works towards affective justice must not remain in disruption, loss and pain but mobilize it for the development of other dispositions. Affect is therefore understood as “a category that encompasses affect, emotion, and feeling and ‘includes impulses, desires, and feelings that get historically constructed in a range of ways’ (Cvetkovich, 2012, p.4)”(Zembylas, 2015). This distinguishes affect from individual emotional processes and draws the link to wider social practices and norms. In pursuing affective justice, ‘good pedagogy’ would incorporate difficult knowledge with the aims of provoking and inviting learners to engage with the ‘consequences of difficult knowledge’ (Zembylas, 2015); the purpose is not mere disruption, but disruption that allows for new relations and desires to emerge.  I draw on cognitive, relational, and affective justice as key elements of a global justice literacy framework that embraces a post-critical approach to transformation in North-South mobility experiences. Stein et al. (2017) affirm Sousa Santos’ call for thinking about alternatives in alternative ways, “not as building pre-determined solutions but as collective, messy, ongoing experiments toward the creation of something undefined” (Stein, Hunt, Susa & Andreotti, 2017). It is with this framing that I approach the selected case study, steering myself away from the                                                  12 While north-south mobility experiences, and higher education more broadly, are characterized by diversity in the student population, I am referring here not to analysis of individual student needs or desires but rather how they represent the persistence of modern subjectivities and the tendencies they enable.  - 36 -  hope for a blueprint for an ‘ethical study abroad’ or ideal model for service learning. Rather, I approach the program as a teaching example: an experiment in the field that might offer something new through different logics, narratives and desires.     - 37 -  Chapter 4: Methodology: Case Study This research is a qualitative case study grounded on observations and participant interviews, of an alternative practice of service learning and study abroad that embraces a post-critical approach and how participants of such an approach experienced ‘transformation’ stemming from their learning experience. According to Stake (1995), ‘case study is the study of the particularity and complexity of a single case, coming to understand its activity within important circumstances’ (p.xi). My qualitative case study draws on participant observation and semi structured interviews with participants in the School for International Training: Social Innovation and Community Development program in Fortaleza, Brazil.  Before I delve into the specifics of this research study, I must layout one conceptual ethical concern/consideration pertaining to the focus on privileged elites that is highlighted throughout this work. I must outline here why I am producing (yet another) scholarly work which amplifies the voices of actors from the Global North and their experiences in the South despite significant literature highlighting the need for further research to ‘give voice’ to the perspectives of host communities and local partners involved in these types of experiences (Whiteman, 2015). Why am I using the narratives of privileged individuals who partake in these experiences in an attempt to understand the potential for such educational encounters to work towards global justice? I find that it is important to explore educational encounters in these North-South mobility experiences that attempt to hold those that benefit from the current systems accountable without limiting the ensuing reactions to paralysis and/or shame but instead mobilize different possibilities of knowing and being.  Participant observation is useful in capturing rules and norms that are taken for granted in the setting of study, and attending to actions and instances that might otherwise not be viewed as relevant to the ‘story’ of the case (Guest, Namey & Mitchell, 2013, p. 78). According to Bernard (2006), there are several reasons to conduct participant observation: “it reduces the problem of reactivity- of people changing their behavior when they know that they are being studied...Presence builds trust. Trust lowers reactivity”, it “helps you ask sensible questions”, “gives you an intuitive understanding of what’s going on”, and “allows you to speak with confidence about the meaning of data” (p. 355). It is therefore well suited to my exploratory objectives.  - 38 -  I conducted semi-structured interviews with five of the participants of the 2017 cohort in the program that were scheduled for one and a half hours but that lasted between thirty minutes and two and a half hours. These interviews were centered around questions I developed throughout the research process.  Semi structured interviews, according to Galetta and Cross (2013), “incorporate both open-ended and more theoretically driven questions, eliciting data grounded in the experience of the participant as well as data guided by existing constructs in the particular discipline within which one is conducting research” (p. 45). This research seeks to answer questions centered on this specific educational North-South mobility experience and its potential to produce a post-critical transformation. Therefore, many of the interview questions focused on whether or not participants self-identified as ‘transformed’ by their experience, what participants perceived as necessary conditions for such a transformation, and what that kind of transformation would or did feel like. The research also seeks to explore how participants’ relationships to themselves, to others and to knowledge shifted, were challenged, or were reinforced. The final interview questions that were structured to elicit thoughts and comments on intentions and expectations, shifts or transformations in learning, discomfort, dialogue, relationships with people, relationships with knowledge, complicity, pedagogical considerations, and possible future models of engagement were drawn from guides that I created in response to emergent themes from the data I had actively been collecting and preliminarily analyzing on an ongoing basis. As Saldana (2016) notes, as a researcher, “your level of personal involvement- as a participant observer- as a peripheral, active, or complete member during fieldwork- filters how you perceive, document and thus code your data” (p. 7).  My ongoing and consistent participation in each of the experiences available to the participants of this study filtered and shaped the way I collected data and how the participants responded to me. Saldana elaborates that “the majority of qualitative researchers will code their data both during and after collection as an analytic tactic, for coding is analysis” (2016, p. 7). By paying attention to the themes that emerged through my field notes, I was able to create an interview guide that asked questions that corresponded to those very themes.  The codes I used are noted as intentions and expectations, shifts or transformations in learning, discomfort, relationships with people, relationships with knowledge, dialogue, complicity, pedagogical considerations and future model. These are each themes that correspond to my guiding research questions by focusing on how and to what extent this kind of educational  - 39 -  programming shifts desires, but also how initial desires, expectations, and intentions framed each participant’s experience and thus the data in their interview. The questions about shifts or transformations in learning were designed to see what self-identified changes the participants could point to as a consequence of the program, whether or not they thought their education here had been transformative, why or why not and what conditions allow for that kind of transformation- this is to help either identify what is working, to highlight areas with potential or identify areas that were lacking and need to be focused on in future programming. The questions about discomfort were intended to explore whether or not participants experienced feelings of being overwhelmed and ‘paralysed’ as a result of feeling discomfort and how they were or were not able to move through this. This connected to my questions that centered on complicity and feeling linked to the problem and the solution of the realities encountered through the program. The questions concerning dialogue allowed me to ask if there were instances of learning generated through modes other than academic/intellectual. Additionally, asking about their relationship to knowledge was an attempt to map any shifts in how they relate to ideas of poverty, wealth, development, superiority, inferiority, other knowledge systems and to explore how the program might have impacted this. The brief asides in the interview that focused on the tools were intended to gage whether they were useful and how participants responded to the vocabulary offered. Finally, questions pertaining to a future model were used to probe whether a different and new model for North-South mobility experiences is possible and desired in the mind of the participants.  Despite selecting these initial themes to focus on throughout my interviews, the responses generated several others that I will touch upon in the presentation of the interview data and corresponding analysis. These themes that I had not as intentionally coded for were that of identity as a crucial and primary lens through which transformation was undertaken. The second was a frustration with a focus on problems and a desire for solutions that were actionable and concrete. These themes demonstrate key components of the student experience to keep in mind.  As there is no one way to conduct interview analysis, “no via regia, to arrive at essential meanings and deeper implications of what is said in an interview” the method I chose relied on several stages of familiarizing myself with the data, pre-coding and coding the data (Kvale, 2008). I pre-coded the transcripts by reading through and annotating passages that either linked to the themes I had initially intended to explore in some way, reflections that corresponded to  - 40 -  observations in my field notes (both affirming and contradictory), and any other moments that seemed to be significant in the narratives that participants constructed about their experience. I re-read each of the transcripts in their entirety four times to become familiar with the data and through this was able to draw connections between what was said and how it answered (in part) one of my research questions as well as how it compared to responses made by other participants to similar questions. During the interview process I had also taken notes on the demeanour of the participants and used this as well as some of the information I had gathered in their opening questions to create participant overview paragraphs. I then re-coded the data according to the strongest themes, merging some initial categories of response and specifying others. After demonstrating the themes that emerged in each of these sections across the participants, I will highlight how each contribute to the research questions at hand.  Beyond the semi-structured interviews, my case study also relied on participant observation to explore the processes and learning moments that the participants I interviewed experienced and were involved with. I took extensive field notes each day during my research and distilled those into coherent reflections at the end of each week with the attention to what was working, what was not working and what could be done to align with cognitive, affective, relational justice in more generative ways. These reflections demonstrate how my analysis was ongoing and two staged; it involved a preliminary analysis that fostered self-reflection and in condensing those initial field notes into weekly reflections, it allowed my analysis to indicate emergent themes. As Cohen and Crabtree (2008) note, “identifying emergent themes while observing allows you to shift your attention in ways that can foster a more developed investigation”. Beyond identifying these emergent themes, I integrated them into weekly reflection discussions and activities that I held for the participants. How they responded to the introduction to these themes shaped how I crafted the final version of my interview guides [See Appendix B]. Although I was unable to join the first four weeks of the program, I attended all lectures, academic events and daily activities coordinated through the program for the remainder of the four months. Through my constant presence I was able to deepen my knowledge of the type of experiences participants were involved in and although I arrived in Brazil with tentative interview scripts, I allowed my observations of the program and participants’ reactions to it to guide the thematic content of the interviews (Kvale, 2008). While the tools I used are associated  - 41 -  with the traditional hierarchies of research (object-subject), I rely on these qualitative research methods such as those outlined above not to perform generalizable analysis, but as a way of collecting and conveying stories that emerge out of the conversations between facilitators, participants, researcher, communities in which the research is being conducted that might open up possibilities for transformation in north-south mobility experiences in higher education. I aim to remain intelligible to the educational institutions (among other audiences) who practice and promote service learning and study abroad as an educational encounter while continuing to outline and push for pedagogical framing that might allow these encounters to engender new types of transformation.   Context: Description of the Selected Case: Social Innovation and Community Development Program in Fortaleza, Brazil   The Social Innovation and Community Development Program is a Study Abroad program accredited by the School for International Training, a Vermont, US based nonprofit educational institution that is accredited by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges, Inc. (NEASC) through its Commission on Institutions of Higher Education (Brazil: Social Innovation, 2017). SIT acts as a third party provider in connecting students from various (accepted) American universities with local programs across the world. In Study Abroad literature, SIT is identified as an innovative actor in North-South mobility experience in that they “state that their goal is the ‘development of an appreciative, non-exploitative relationship with people of another culture’. The objective of this approach is not improved commerce, national advantage or religious conversion, [...] but solely as an end in itself, as a means toward building a closer human community” (Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich, 2015, p.47). As an organization, they aim “for learners to ‘recognize the essential unity and interrelatedness of all peoples’”(Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich, 2015, p.48). They work towards this by shifting the way in which they view the success of their programs. The “School for International Training define the ‘success’ of experiential study abroad as ‘the degree to which a person is able to enter into respectful, appreciative (though not necessarily admiring) relationships with a culture other than his or her own, and discover some values that have personal significance and a sense of common humanity” (Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich, 2015, p.63). It is this organizational context from which the specific program studied in this research emerges.   - 42 -  The Social Innovation and Community Development Program is based in Fortaleza in the state of Ceara, Brazil, with excursions to Manaus, Rio de Janeiro, Paraty, and Salvador. The program examines “the human and social challenges confronting northeast Brazil and the innovative ways Afro-brazilians and Indigenous communities are casting off the legacy of 500 years of colonialism (Brazil: Social Innovation, 2017). The promotional materials encourage participants to “explore the cultural and spiritual traditions that have endured and emerged through the forced migration of African peoples to Brazil”, “to witness the diverse challenges of Indigenous people in rural and urban environments and their creative movements for social justice, health and other human rights”, “discover how rural workers [in the Rural Landless Workers Movement (MST)] are transforming their lived reality through agrarian reform and by building people centered democratic institutions”, as well as to “reflect deeply on your place in a post-colonial world, and find inspiration and hope through participation with a local organization on an innovative community project” and the opportunity for participants to advance their Portuguese language skills (Brazil: Social Innovation, 2017). This is important as it frames how the program was presented to participants and this framing inevitably influence not only their motivation to apply, but also how they made meaning of their time in Brazil. The tuition for the semester long program (12 weeks) is $15, 715 USD  and the cost of room and board is $3, 260 USD (Brazil: Social Innovation, 2017); however, many of the participants in the 2017 cohort were fully funded by their home universities.   The courses for which the participants gain credit are: LACB 3005: Decolonization and Community Action in Brazil, LACB 3000: Social Justice and Decolonial Grass-Roots Movements13, and LACB 3060: Community Development Project in Social Justice: Exploring Brazil’s Community Based Models of Development. The structure/itinerary of the program for the 2017 Spring Cohort (and thus the timeline of my research activities) is attached in Appendix D.  While the above information about the intentions and aims of the program is taken predominantly from the program website and 2017 educational materials such as the course syllabi, those documents have shifted focus and language in the time I spent there as a result of some of our ongoing conversations- I have included the re-adjusted syllabi in the appendices as                                                  13 I have attached the reworked version of the syllabus in Appendix E to demonstrate one avenue of reciprocity undertaken in this research.  - 43 -  they are representative of some of the outcomes of my research there. I note this because it is just one example of how this research provides a snapshot of a picture that is very much moving and alive and that the student responses and my observations capture one moment in time.  It is also important to note that this was the penultimate semester of the program. This was only discovered towards the end of the program as the School for International Training was pulling all of its programs in Brazil due to financial and economic stability reasons. While this might raise questions as to the relevance and continuity of the research, this factor enhanced the desire of all involved to document and experiment with what could be learned from the closing of this program and potentially aid in the creation of something new that grows from the lessons learned here.    Data Collection: While I have outlined above that the methods I used for data collection were semi-structured in depth-interviews and participant observation, it is important that I make clear exactly how I carried out these processes and then describe my methods of analysis as well. Each step sought to bring light to the specific questions I aimed to answer within the feasible and practical scope of this Master’s thesis research. Those questions were:   1. How do participants demonstrate that their relationships to themselves, to others, and to knowledge have shifted, been challenged, or been reinforced through the Social Innovation and Community Development program? 2. How do participants articulate how they identify or disidentify with an experience of transformation in the Social Innovation and Community Development program? What conditions do the participants identify as being required for transformation to take place? 3. What were perceived as effective and limiting pedagogical efforts to foster global justice literacy in the Social innovation and community development program?  I predominantly relied on the interviews to shed light on the first two questions and used the participant observation in conjunction with those findings to answer the third question. The interviews were conducted in my final week of field research, while the participant observation was ongoing. Thus, I will outline what exactly my participant observation entailed and how it  - 44 -  impacted the interview process, before moving onto the next section which will detail what I found through my observations, then the interviews, how I interpreted and analyzed what was found and finally a discussion about how the data answers or expands on the research questions I was investigating. The mix of these two methods culminating in my case story allowed me to gain different angles and approaches into the exploration of the potential for North-South mobility experiences to foster transformations that provoke dispositions geared towards global (cognitive) justice. Even though I am focusing almost exclusively on the ‘visitor’s’ experience, I am not approaching the participant interviews with distance or objectivity, but rather with the insight into the specifics of their experiences in the program, as afforded to me through the unlimited access to program activities and excursion extended by the Academic Director, Bill Calhoun. My observations are clearly made through the lens of the conceptual framework and approach I have outlined in previous chapters and thus I am attuned to certain moments and conversations because of this push to explore the potential of this field in generating new and different educational spaces. As the research tool (which is what, in this qualitative piece of research, I am), I am calibrated to identify and document moments of significance and potential that help demonstrate what is working and what is not in using the North-South mobility experience to provoke shifts in dispositions towards global justice literacy. At the same time, I am exploring and documenting the transformative aspect of this process through the narratives of participants who do not necessarily have this background or perspective. Below is the process I undertook to explore and document both the participants’ perspectives and mine, as an educational researcher, as to the experience of transformation and the potential for global justice literacy education to take place in North-South mobility experiences.  The site for this case was selected due to Dr. Andreotti’s professional experience with the program and the Academic Director, Bill Calhoun, through the EarthCARE network and Ecoversities Alliance. Dr.Andreotti had joined the program previously as a visiting lecturer in Fortaleza at the invitation of the Academic Director. During this visit, she identified the site preliminarily as one which was attempting to do things differently in the field of North-South mobility experiences. Dr. Andreotti’s familiarization with the context was therefore a result of circumstantial invitation. She engages with the program now as a collaborative researcher, but was initially invited in to provide input on the pedagogical experiment and also observe what was happening as a critical friend. The extension of the Academic Director’s invitation to me  - 45 -  took place in August of 2016. I was invited to experience the program and work collaboratively with the Academic Director to re-orient and refine some of the pedagogical and logistical components of the program. Although I did function there as a researcher, I was warmly welcomed into the community of learners that comprise the Social Innovation and Community Development program, staff and student alike. I was invited to document the processes and conversations that emerged within the case, with an implicit understanding that doing so was important for the practitioners and participants of the program in order to record an interpretation of what was occurring which has many yet-to-be determined implications for how this type of education might continue.  I arrived in Fortaleza, Brazil on April 9th, 2017.  During the first two weeks I familiarized myself with the program, the city and the language and then was joined by my supervisor, Dr.Vanessa Andreotti who led three days of seminars to provide a background to the theory and context of global education in this encounter and also allowed us to collectively agree on the use of three pedagogical tools throughout their time in the program. I include the full version of the tools [see Appendix C] because I used them three more times when hosting reflective discussions which generated moments and conversations that emerged both in my observations and in the interviews. Thus, they played a part in framing the process and providing the participants with a specific vocabulary with which to discuss their experiences. As such my comments on them in this section integrate these tools into the methodology and method section, rather than my observations of participants’ reactions to them which would in that case be included in my presentation of the data. The tools were created in collaboration with the participants, based on previous readings, to allow them to have a set of vocabulary and guiding questions to track their responses to the many social innovation and community development organizations they were about to visit in the states of Ceara, Rio de Janeiro, Amazonas, and Bahia. These tools were gathered and refined from practical and theoretical works in global education by Dr. Andreotti (Andreotti, 2014a; Andreotti, 2011; Andreotti, 2016b; Andreotti et al. 2015; Andreotti, 2016c; Stein et al. 2017). The first of the three tools was the `Visiting, talking and interacting: (re)framing tool` which presented participants with a social cartography of orientations of social change developed by (Andreotti, Stein, Ahenakew & Hunt, 2015). The diagram presents different theories of change that can be characterized as soft-, radical-, and  - 46 -  beyond- reform14 (Andreotti et al. 2015). The participants were encouraged to consider where along the social cartography they would place each social innovation and/or community development organization that they visited and interacted with and to consider their interpretations of what each organization defined as the problem it sought to address, the nature of the problem, their proposed solution and the organization`s role in it. Additionally, the participants were presented with the EarthCARE justice principles I outlined in my conceptual framework and encouraged to identify how the organization they visited addressed or prioritized each and/or any of the outlined notions of justice. The second tool that was presented to the participants was a table adapted from the Through Other Eyes project (Andreotti & de Souza, 2008) that allowed participants to consider what understanding of poverty and wealth informed the work of the organization they were interacting with and how the organization approached the issue of poverty. The third tool was a condensed set of self-reflexive questions to keep in mind throughout their interaction with organizations and their community development project placement. How these tools were taken up or not is noted in the presentation of the data, but I include it here as one of the ways in which the conversations were framed. The following week we went as a group to an MST settlement for a youth gathering. Then Dr. Vanessa Andreotti left and I continued with the group to Rio de Janeiro, Paraty, Manaus and Salvador for a total of three weeks wherein as a group we met with a variety of actors and organizations committed to various forms of global justice grounded in their local movements. We returned to Fortaleza as a group and the participants began their three week long community placement while I was invited to work on reframing the current program to more effectively embrace a post-critical approach through redesigns of rationales and course syllabi. The participants then returned and wrote up their final reports, I condensed my observations (field notes I had been writing consistently since my first day in Brazil) into reflective vlogs and coherent stories of what I witnessed and finalized my research guides so that they reflected specifics of the experiences I witnessed. The field notes I collected through conducting participant observation provided context and detail in relation to the research questions that                                                  14 For a more detailed explanation of these distinct but overlapping spaces, see Andreotti, V., Stein, S.,  Ahenakew, C. & D. Hunt. (2015). Mapping interpretations of decolonization in the context of higher education. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 4(1).   - 47 -  helped clarify what I needed to ask in the interviews. I then conducted 1.5-2 hour long interviews with them, transcribed them, and returned to Canada.  This thesis is ultimately my proposal for a pedagogical shift in the field of educational North-South mobility encounters based on the findings that emerged from investigating my proposed research questions. Although the research conducted and collected through the undertaking of this thesis project has bearing on various fields in higher education15, this thesis serves as an intervention rather than a report and thus is focused on mobilizing knowledge with a view to propose a different experimentation in the field.  In the following sections I move from a focus on the process of my research to its findings of consequence.                                                       15 I believe further research can and should be conducted relating a global justice literacy framework to sustainable development education, teaching with/through complexity and uncertainty, global citizenship education, community engaged scholarship and experiential education.   - 48 -  Chapter Five: Presentation of Data: This research seeks to answer questions centered on this specific educational North-South mobility experience and its potential to produce a post-critical transformation.  I begin the presentation of the data collected through this research with an in depth summary of the responses provided by each participant in their interview. Many of the interview questions focused on whether or not participants self-identified as ‘transformed’ by their experience, what participants perceived as necessary conditions for such a transformation, and what that kind of transformation would or did feel like. The research also seeks to explore how participants’ relationships to themselves, to others and to knowledge shifted, were challenged, or were reinforced and what they perceived was pedagogically effective in facilitating these shifts. All participants were between the ages of 20-23 and attended university in the US. They were at varying stages of their undergraduate degrees, studying very diverse subjects, and from diverse backgrounds. All names have been changed to protect participants’ anonymity.  Camila Camila is a young Latina woman who attends a prestigious college in the US. She studies sociology and philosophy. She is fluent in Spanish and had a very high level of Portuguese upon arrival in Brazil. As a result of her educational and personal interests, she came to the program with a well-versed vocabulary concerning oppression, intersectionality, colonialism. Initially, she was attracted to the program because it seemed more immersive than other prospective programs and seemed to be grounded in connections to local NGOs; this was something that was appealing to her as she wanted to go beyond a surface level understanding of Brazil. Her interview was the longest of the five and was rich, complex, and unpredictable; however, one of the overwhelming themes that emerged from our conversation was her desire for concrete actions and solutions instead of more exposure to problems that she already knew (to some extent) existed. Additionally, it was clear that her identity played a huge role not only in her time in Brazil but specifically on how she sees the world, and thus her response to the question of whether or not she felt transformed (she said she did not) is largely influenced by her identity.  She was especially drawn to this program because it was very immersive and compared to other Study Abroad programs seemed to offer a deeper community link that would allow her to learn about Brazil beyond a superficial education.   - 49 -  I have included the above details because in the interviews it is clear that individual identity filtered the responses and experiences of the participants. This influence of identity and previous life experience before starting the program is brought up by Camila at different points in the interview. She reflects on what she learned in relation to her previous education. Camila repeatedly noted that perhaps her prior education about issues of colonialism, racism and sexism etc. meant that she felt she did not learn very much new content; “I 100% think that my education up until this point has been really positive in the sense that I have had the opportunity to discuss these things, like these are not new conversations to me, talking about colonialism is not new to me. I like to think that I am fairly aware of how colonialism has affected me and my ancestry and where I come from. So yeah, in that sense, like content wise there wasn’t a ton of new stuff and even when it was, it was like new but not that different.”  Camila felt that because she studied at an institution that encouraged reflection on systems of oppression and her involvement in Latinx organizations on campus, she was already familiar with the way systems oppress peoples (through racism and misogyny, for example) and so rather than learning about the existence of patterns of oppression, she was more struck by how the context of Brazil turned out not to be as different from the US as she had thought. She felt that she did learn (or at least, re-learn) the importance of solidarity and an appreciation of the interconnectedness of struggles being fought in the US and Brazil and how this affected her relationships: “It kind of went beyond my expectations or at least outside of them- things that I hadn’t anticipated learning or needing to learn, again, just the importance of solidarity and just reminding myself how to be a good ally to communities that I’m not a part of and just humanizing all of us and coming back to: is my struggle very different from theirs? And when it is, so what, like does that mean I should care less?” This question that Camila poses is rhetorical in one sense, but at the same time she is deeply concerned with how much to care for others and from what distance, something that emerges in her considerations of her own complicity and how she relates to others. She felt that she could relate because:  “We have something in common, they’re talking about stuff that I’ve talked about but now I’m doing it in a different country, and maybe I haven’t talked to Indigenous  - 50 -  communities, but, oh wait, they’re dismantling the same systems”. When I asked Camila if she was saying that she could see more connections between the different struggles, she said,  “Yeah, I think those were just made obvious to me.” Her focus on interconnectedness remains at an intellectual level (in this excerpt) as she refers to feeling like she could relate to people she had otherwise not felt related to on the basis of shared political/identity struggles and could academically explain how their fights were tied together by a shared desire for justice for marginalized peoples.  Camila’s discussion of what she learned (as illustrated above) emphasizes how her identity (educational and personal) played an important role in framing her experiences throughout the program. Camila details how she did not find the content of the program the most impactful component of the program, instead she found that the possibility of making connections in situations where she was uncomfortable was one of the most significant components of her learning. She felt that beyond learning Portuguese, she also learned “how to communicate with people who are from very different backgrounds than your own, looking to find something, anything, in common with people”.  In reflecting on what she learned, Camila demonstrated serious contemplation about the ideas of reciprocity in the educational relationship and structure within which she participated. What she identifies as significant points toward significant learning and an embrace of discomfort but not necessarily a transformation as outlined in previous chapters.  Camila herself notes that she does not identify with feeling ‘transformed’. In fact, Camila was adamant that she did not think she had been transformed by the program. Part of the reasoning behind this response was built on her experience in other educational spaces which she felt had been transformative and, in comparison, she felt that this experience lacked certain components that contributed to such an impact. She did not feel that the time in Brazil had led her to feel like a different person, and saw it more as a real world application of theory- again, demonstrating her political/academic interpretation of the experience and its impacts, rather than an existential/visceral one.  In contrast to her experience in Brazil, she highlights how although the other educational experiences outside of this program were much shorter, she had a deeper connection (perhaps because the participants were already united by similar political  - 51 -  identities16). She states: “I lived and breathed with these people for a week, like we lived together, I was surrounded by these people, all of whom were strangers...but it was a very immersive setting, there was the time to build these like very deep relationships because you had a week and there’s just something about having that communal living and interacting with people, and also being prompted to have some of these conversations.” This speaks to the explicit relationship building component of those transformative experiences, and suggests that similar framing and intentional community building across difference is needed for participants to feel viscerally connected to others in similar ways. Although she did not identify as transformed, I identified a shift in Camila from the beginning to the end of the program, most significantly in her discussions around complicity. Therefore, despite not identifying the experience as transformative, there were some indications of shifts which I will explore further later on.  It was clear in her articulation of ‘transformative’ and the examples she chose to draw on as evidence of transformative educational encounters, she thought that the conditions required for a transformative encounter included an emphasis on relationship building, self-reflection and the development of action-oriented tools. In her own words;  “I would say transformation has a lot to do with the individual self and some new knowledge, some very new, kind of profound- one of those things that you’re going to carry with you for the rest of your life, to me is transformative...I’ve done things that have been transformative for me, and this is not that same kind of feeling. Those other transformative events...one of them helped me establish my identity as a Xicana living in the US and it was very transformative in the sense that after that I viewed myself, my own positionality, totally different. I had this drive to continue to pursue these things, continue to learn more about myself and that affected the way that I interacted with other people, it very much changed a lot of my things, it really challenged me to see the world in a new way and see myself in a very different way.” I have included this fairly lengthy excerpt from Camila’s interview because it demonstrates not only how she experienced transformation in other educational spaces, but articulates how she views transformation. She outlined that those transformative experiences that she referred to                                                  16 The other educational experiences she referred to in depth in her interview as deeply transformative were a Xicana-Latino Youth Leadership Conference and a Rotary Youth Leadership gathering.  - 52 -  provided tools for deeper learning and engagement and that her understanding of transformation was some acquiring of new knowledge. Her conceptualization of transformation is grounded on epistemic certainty; her insistence on transformative experiences providing tools for actions and ways forward demonstrates a resistance to uncertainty. This indicates how students’ understandings and expectations of transformation colored what they were open to experiencing through the program. In response to the research question which asks whether participants of the program experienced transformation and what conditions they identify as necessary for transformation to take place, Camila did not experience self-identified transformation and the conditions she thought were required for such an experience to unfold were as listed above: foundations in relationship building, self-reflection and the development of (action oriented) tools to move forward with.   Even though Camila places more value on relationship building in North-South mobility educational experiences than any content acquisition, she also highlights some of the barriers to establishing these relationships across difference in meaningful ways. The selected materials from her interview transcript presented in the following paragraphs demonstrate how her relationship to herself, others and knowledge have been challenged and reinforced through the program. Among the language barrier, which she notes briefly, Camila cites both time constraints and a lack of common cultural referents as the largest hindrances to relationship building in her time there. Despite Camila’s earlier responses that demonstrated her emphasis on interpersonal relationships as one of the greatest sources of her learning in the program, for her, the strongest relationships she formed were with other participants of the program, and given the way it is structured, this is to be expected. While Camila’s relationship to others was strengthened through a more developed awareness of the ties between peoples’ fights for justice in Brazil and the US, her relationship to knowledge was more interesting to explore in light of the research questions.  Throughout the program, the participants were confronted with the persistence of knowledge systems that were very different from their own: that had different relationships with self, bodies, time, tradition and land. The interactions in Manaus, Amazonas made this the most clear and thus the most fruitful space in which to engage in conversations about our relationship to knowledge and the epistemic dominance that persists in our thinking. Camila’s relationship to  - 53 -  knowledge was challenged, to some extent, but she also demonstrated a (self-aware) desire to reinforce her own beliefs and use her experiences and interactions in the program to support them. The following excerpt from her interview illustrates Camila’s resistance to systems of knowledge that are different from her own and how these encounters have shifted her relationship to knowledge.  “...Indigenous medicine and things of that sort...I was/am very skeptical of those things because I have been taught one way and like science to me is one thing, knowledge from science is very concrete, like ‘do you have evidence that, like, this little potion you concocted is going to help them, like do you have evidence that this little like, I don’t know, special cleansing with smoke is actually going to help someone’s mental health’? So for me it is very difficult to accept some of these things. But also, I think focusing on how they are similar in some ways, or how they don’t have to compete with one another or be like entirely contradictory to what you have already been taught to think in...I think that’s like helpful to break that down first, and again sometimes just to confront that discomfort and be like ‘yeah, I’m uncomfortable with this, I don’t fully buy it, like I don’t know what to to tell you’ but then be like, ‘okay, well why don’t you?’...and just kind of, also acknowledging that there are some ways that you can’t necessarily prove your system of knowledge to be better in the same way that they might not be able to prove theirs are better...I think sometimes just acknowledging them as different systems of knowledge is important because otherwise you just keep thinking like ‘I’m clearly right about this’...I would say for sure this whole Indigenous medicine thing, very difficult for me... I think we all think that our way of doing things are better, it’s just what you’re used to doing and I just think we need to talk about those things. We need to discuss why do I feel like I’m doing it the right way and they’re not?” This extended quotation documents how Camila copes with her resistance to different systems of knowledge, and it also demonstrates shifts from pure rejection to a desire to trace her own thoughts and interrogate her own beliefs in an attempt to see both her knowledge system and the one that seemed so foreign to her as one of many possible worldviews. The research question asks whether the program has shifted, challenged or reinforced the participants’ relationship to knowledge, and in some ways the above selection demonstrate all three of these processes.   - 54 -  Camila’s shift in her relationship to knowledge that allowed her to move past complete resistance and rejection of different knowledge systems was accompanied by a shift in how she considered her own complicity in the systems of harm which the participants were studying and observing the real life implications in Brazil. At the start of the program, Camila felt very much that her family, Mexican immigrants to the US, did not benefit from capitalism and as members of a marginalized group had to focus on making it within the system. As a result, in all initial communications with me, Camila was always adamant that change could only come from those who were oppressed taking positions of power and then making change from within whatever system they were operating in. To place this theory of change within the vocabulary of the pedagogical tools offered to the participants, Camila saw social change as possible within the realm of the soft-radical reform space17.  While the quotes below are lengthy, I have included them here in their entirety because they document some shifts in Camila’s thinking as a result of being in the program, as well as the persistence of her frames of thinking.  “I like my life the way it is. I’m pretty happy with my GAP jeans or my shirt from like Ann Taylor Loft or my Rayban sunglasses or just regular eyeglasses. I’m fairly content with all of those things. Going to Walmart and picking up something for two dollars cheaper...so in a lot of these ways I am complicit, like ‘oh, these Forever 21 sandals are on sale, I know they were mass produced in some factory and then shipped here but I don’t have the money to buy something else right now, like in those ways I am complicit to these systems every day. Even just like being a student at [a reputable higher education institution] and continuing to call it an elite institution, like making a distinction between my education and the education of someone in State school. It’s not just about ‘oh, I have more resources or [my school] can pay me to do this, or like they can give me this housing or this much financial aid’ but also just like…’you learn something better’, like ‘your education is more valuable than theirs’ even if we were talking about the same exact issues in our classroom, even if we were reading the same books, something about me doing it at [my prestigious school] is automatically more valuable than my sister’s education at a State college, like, ugh, (sighs)...and I buy into that 100%...Like if I could choose between going to grad school at like fricken Harvard                                                  17 See Appendix C  - 55 -  or like Chico State in California, like, of course I’d go to Harvard, why wouldn’t I? Not just for the money but for the name, the prestige, like, I buy into all of this because I’m benefitting from it.  I am in an elite institution, of course I want to benefit from that. So I’m super complicit in a lot of these things and to be honest, I don’t know what to do about it because...like some things I’m just kind of stuck in, like I can’t change that people are going to look at [my education] a certain way and like deem it a certain way because of its name and its history like I can’t really help that, but I can help looking at my education and my sister’s education and being like: why is mine better, you know? I can help the way that I perceive other people based on things like that, like where you went to school or what kind of company you’re working for...so in that sense I can start working on my attitude towards these systems and really empowering people by appreciating them, valuing them and giving them the same value that I would give myself or someone else. In terms of how do I- I guess I could stop like going to Walmart, but also like not really because I can’t afford to shop at Whole Foods just yet...right now I still have to work within these institutions like I don’t really have an option. I’m stuck here [in an elite academic institution] and I’ve come too far to come back. But like eventually I can start making some of those more conscious choices...There are some things that I’m complicit in, maybe not as willingly, like if it were up to me I wouldn’t be exploiting people in Thailand for my clothes but I think right now I have slightly less of a choice in that, but yeah, just like being aware of it and my attitude and how I look at the world around me, I think it’s a decent start.”  She contemplates how her complicity in systems of oppression is linked to her patterns of consumption and distance from modes of production as a result of current global supply chains. However, she also points out that this consumption is not merely material, but also social and moral because she talks about ‘buying into’ a certain set of ideas about not only the value of higher education but how it is ranked and categorized along a scale of superiority and inferiority. Camila discusses how she is aware of her complicity on both a material and an existential way and the resulting paralysis that this has led to for her, she knows she is complicit but also feels stuck and limited in her choice of what to do about it. This excerpt documents how she is overwhelmed and feels constrained and without agency in the systems that she participates in. Her awareness of her complicity, however, does not interrupt her affective desires or satisfaction  - 56 -  in them. Camila acknowledges that she is trying to justify her complicity but to do so requires ignoring the injustices she can so plainly see;  “I’m still wishing for people to tell me why I can’t just fix capitalism, like tweak it a little bit, because it works for me. I live in the country of capitalism, this is what we do. I have been trying so hard to find some way to defend it...justify, that’s the word, I’m looking to justify it, and I can’t because I don’t know how to. And it’s really frustrating because I don’t want to feel bad about wearing the clothes that I’m wearing right this second, I don’t want to feel bad about these ridiculously marked up glasses that were made in the exact same factory as Walmart glasses, like I don’t want to feel bad about it, but I do.” This shows how her affective investments guide her search for knowledge. Her desires to feel good and to avoid interrupting satisfaction with this feeling good prevent Camila from being able to move beyond a defensiveness of her complicity. She is reading her experience in Brazil for knowledge that will affirm this feeling good. Camila’s awareness of her complicity and her desire to more innocently reinscribe it brings to light questions learners are faced with when uncovering (undeniably) the ways in which they benefit from the systems which they observe causing harm. Put differently, Camila’s reactions demonstrate the provocation of an encounter with difficult knowledge and raises questions about how to pedagogically encourage learners to cope with the uncertainty and disruption that ensues in the pursuit of affective justice and the development of different dispositions, desires and relations. Charania (2011) synthesizes the conflict inevitable in these disruptive educational encounters that often accompany increased (undeniable) awareness of complicity in stating that “we do benefit, the question is, do we object and if so, do we do so in ways that do not reinscribe imperialist impulses and relations?”   (p.367)18. Initially, Camila insisted that she did not benefit from capitalism and colonialism, at the beginning of the program during discussions about how the material privileges and comforts experienced by many of the participants were possible due to (modern) slavery, her reactions were:                                                  18 Charania prefaces this question with: “In the preface to The Colonizer and the Colonized, Albert Memmi poses the following question, ‘ I had to ask myself if I would have condemned colonization so vigorously if I had actually benefited from it myself. I hope so’ (1991/1967, xvi). I find Memmi’s question compelling as it requires those of us who benefit from relations of colonialism and imperialism to confront these very material privileges and comforts.”  - 57 -   “What are you talking about?...If anything I am a slave working for these machines.” However, in her interview she also documented her realization that indeed, as Charania points out, she does benefit from relations of colonialism and imperialism and that this realization was: “just really uncomfortable, like no one wants to think that your life is all just oppressive to other people, like I don’t like thinking of myself as oppressive to other people. And I didn’t want to hear that, I didn’t want to think about myself that way because I was like ‘I’m a pretty woke19 person, I like to think that I know things’ and it was kind of like ‘okay, yes, I know, I know, I know, but, like what do you want me to do?’” This shifting in Camila’s understanding of her complicity requires a brief discussion of important distinctions between systemic and personal complicity as they help frame not only Camila’s articulation of her engagement with her complicity, but the similar and different articulations of the other participants as well. Andreotti (2014c) distinguishes between four different combinations of beliefs in systemic and personal innocence, illustrating that they are not mutually exclusive. In Camila’s case, she seems to have initially been committed to affective investments in systemic complicity and personal innocence (in that she had been oppressed by the systems that structure society, but on a personal level had not done something wrong. However, her interview demonstrates some of the questioning and widening of her complicity in harm as she began to consider how she wanted to maintain her personal innocence even in the face of personal complicity. This presents a challenge to the facilitation of transformation premised on commitments to affective justice. The quote above also illustrates how Camila experiences the internal conflict that comes with learning about and confronting one’s complicity in systems of oppression and the persistent desire to ‘feel good’. Layered on top of this is her perspective as a latina in the US who she feels is already marginalized and thus is uncomfortable about hearing how despite this she still plays a role in the continued marginalization of others. Identity was very clearly a factor in how the participants responded to provocations of their complicity. Also evident in these selected quotations is Camila’s desire for concrete action in the face of confronting her complicity; this is a central theme that emerges from each of the interview transcripts and is something that has implications for how education in North-South                                                  19 Woke is a term with Black origins which describes being aware of social justice issues, particularly issues regarding racial justice. The term continues to be in flux and used by changing and many communities. See:  "Stay Woke: The new sense of 'woke' is gaining popularity". Words We're Watching. Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 26 December 2016.  - 58 -  mobility experiences are enacted, a theme that I will return to later. The above excerpts demonstrate how Camila’s relationship with herself and her understanding of her self-image were challenged during her time in the program in Brazil as a result of confronting some of the ways in which she was complicit in the processes she saw unfolding and affecting people in front of her in Brazil. Beyond Camila’s grappling with complicity and her desire to maintain her self-image as constructed prior to the program, she also experienced some tension around the ways her identity was perceived in Brazil which prompted further reflection on her relationships to and between self and others. For instance, Camila felt conflicted at being called a ‘gringa’ in Brazil because she would never think of herself that way because at home she is not. As she said: “The fact that I am a Latina literally doesn’t make a difference here because I’m not this kind of Latina.” She found that her identity allowed her to relate to some experiences as a Latina but that overall that the extent of the usefulness of her experience was relegated to her knowledge as a Latina in the US. This experience of newly being a gringa seemed to solidify Camila’s identity as an American, because it was clear that her Latinx experience was that of an American Latina. Her American-ness and reflection on it allowed Camila to delve into some reflection on narratives of superiority and inferiority in her interview which were complicated by a claim of epistemic privilege/entitlement as a result of her lived experience as a minority in the US. Camila touches on how narratives of superiority and inferiority, development and progress impacted how she was reading people and how she was being read; thus influencing the nature of the relationships she was able to build with others. In particular she was troubled by: “...this idea that people in other countries really do have these images in their mind about what it means to be American or what it is to be from the States and I think some of them are really ill-informed ideas. I’ve had to explain that we also have corruption in our government, like ‘surprise’ there are poor people in the US who can’t afford to eat every day. We have issues with, like, polluted water, we have all of these same things, we’re not that different from Brazil- that’s probably my biggest takeaway. I might be from this, you know, first world country that’s supposed to be in the top of things and blah blah blah, but it’s not very different. My lived reality is only somewhat different from some of these individuals and I think that was kind of surprising to me.”  - 59 -  This speaks to the potential for North-South mobility experiences to disrupt some of the dominant narratives that historically characterize these relationships. It also shows how these educational spaces allow for a sense of interconnectedness and interdependence to be realized in a very tangible way. The above paragraphs demonstrate how Camila’s relationships with herself, others, and knowledge were challenged through the program and the extent to which there were self-identified and/or observable shifts. The final research question is concerned with ascertaining what pedagogical efforts were perceived as effective or limiting in fostering global justice literacy in the program. Camila did not find the explicit tools (the map of theories of change, the distinctions between material and existential wealth, and the self-reflective questions) particularly useful. In fact, she was quite disappointed in the lack of tools that she felt she had acquired to go about social innovation and community development after her involvement in the program. She highlighted an emerging desire for action and concrete steps forward that was echoed in the interviews with many of the other participants. Camila highlighted how she was disappointed that she was not given the answers to the increasingly complex questions she was facing about systems/social change: “I was sort of asked like, ‘great, now that you have this information [about forms of oppression in Brazil], how are you going to move forward, like what do you do with this, how do you change things back home’ and that was a little bit disappointing because that’s what I thought I would be learning here, like, alright, now I understand coloniality and how it like impacts on day to day lives but where do I go from here? ...I think I got a lot of ‘here is all of this background and context, now that you know how unfair the world is, what are you going to do’ and I was kind of like: ‘I mean I know, I know these problems but I’m looking for solutions, I want to know what this community is actively doing’ and sometimes I felt like...we’d go into projects and lectures and we’d just get a lot of background and history and more theory, but not so much the practical...it was just a lot of information on how do you have these discussions, what do these systems mean to us but not what are my next steps and that to me was the lacking part”.  From her interview, it is clear that Camila was frustrated about not knowing what the next steps were to relieve or reduce her complicity and how overwhelming it was not only to be presented with issues but with the interconnectedness and pervasiveness of these issues. In the face of  - 60 -  being presented with the problems facing communities locally and globally it is overwhelming to try to figure out what to do.  Camila reasserts that, “...transformativeness is really just in ‘what can I now do and I feel like I have the power to do something’, not just like ‘oh my god, this world is so chaotic, so problematic, so many things’, but walking away with something that you can concretely do’.”  Her desire for action informs her meaning and understanding of transformation and her emphasis on the importance of doing as a result of it. Camila sums up her main focus:  “What I’m most concerned with, this like ‘now what’ like ‘what do I do now?’”  This urge to start with this question needs to be seriously examined in North-South mobility experiences. It demonstrates a circular affective desire to ‘fix’ and ‘solve’ that limits the types of transformation that are possible as a result of these experiences to those that can be characterized in the critical, rather than post-critical approach. At the same time, the purpose of encouraging participants to face their complicities is not to leave them in a state of discomfort, paralysis or loss but to allow the discomfort (that Camila demonstrates she wants to move away from) to produce new imaginings. These statements highlight the challenges involved with embracing a post-critical approach to north-south mobility experiences: challenges of articulating the purpose and aims of the experience and challenges of designing the experience in such a way as to face complicity and discomfort with a move to working towards undefined solutions rather than efforts that will absolve our guilt and allow us to continue to ‘feel good’. To do so requires a curriculum that goes beyond troubling and disrupting worldviews shaped by dominant narratives, histories, and identities and is one that is focused on building and experimentation, action without guarantees. Part of this requires participants to engage not only with new relationships with self and others, but with knowledge as well. One of the central challenges to implementing a post-critical approach is making this ambiguity clear to the participants- many of whom clearly come to the experience with expectations of learning outcomes that include action, solutions, tools, and methods that might allow them to ‘fix’, ‘solve’, and ‘absolve’ them out of complicity, discomfort and participation in systems of harm, desires which sometimes characterize a critical orientation.  To reiterate the extent to which Camila’s response to her growing awareness of her complicity and resulting encounters with uncertainty, I have included an extended excerpt from  - 61 -  her interview transcript which demonstrates the depth of her investments in action to correct for her privilege: “I think initially it’s kind of important to be a little bit overwhelmed just because it’s eye opening...I think it’s helpful to feel kind of overwhelmed, but I think the next step really is ‘what do I do?’ and that’s the one thing that I don’t feel I’ve gotten so much out of. It was more like ‘here’s all of the reasons why we should be overwhelmed, here’s why you should feel guilty about your life, here’s how they should feel guilty about their lives, and here’s how you’re being oppressed without even knowing it’, and it’s like ‘well, great, thank you’ and then that leads into like existential crisis like ah what do I do now and that’s I think where it often ended and I think then it becomes...anxiety inducing for certain people when you don’t have another step after that it’s just like here’s this entire mess of problems, now you know it exists, and because the program is very adamant like we have to do something about it, but I don’t know what...a lack of tools I think again, like if you’re aware if you’re made to feel a little overwhelmed at first, it’s a good thing because you’re realizing, you know ‘I can’t just go about living my life blindly, like I have to accept this, I have to acknowledge these systems at play’ and when you see that and acknowledge it and really realize this is real, I think most people feel inclined to be like ‘oh, now I kind of have to do something about it, I can’t just go out and pretend to be like oh the world is beautiful and fine’...And that’s what I came here to learn and still don’t really...it makes me wonder if there is an answer at all, if there is no answer I would like for them to tell me that. Honestly, because now I’m just kind of in more turmoil, like what do I do now? ...Here, literally everything is presented to us as a huge problem and it’s just like ‘what do you want me to do’?... it’s good to learn about these things but for me what was really lacking was the ‘let’s do something about it, let’s tackle it’ let it sink in enough for you to now feel like alright revved up ready to go ‘I need to do something, it’s just there are so many things that it’s just kind of like…(sighs)...” Camila’s frustration with not being provided actions or tools to work towards progress demonstrate the challenges of designing a program that embraces a post-critical approach and the reluctance of many learners to embrace uncertainty. This can be seen as a challenge to cognitive justice, and therefore, relational and affective justice. Camila came to the program to learn how  - 62 -  to do something about the problems facing the world today and her role in them and she articulates her frustration in not achieving that in the program and asserts that: ‘if there is no answer I would like for them to tell me that’. This again, points to the need for post-critical programs to articulate explicitly that the urge to fix and solve in the name of progress is one grounded in epistemic certainty and that to truly engage with the complexity of the educational encounter, participants will be invited instead to engage with epistemic uncertainty. A post-critical approach makes clear that extrapolation and envisioning of ‘better’ futures based on what is known/learned about the present are “not the only (and perhaps not even the ‘best’) route to conceptualizing the notion of ‘responsibility for the future’” (Osberg, 2017, p. 7). Camila’s reflections demonstrate how the program challenged the ways she related to people and to knowledge but did not necessarily lead to an overall shift into thinking or relating differently because of an attachment to the need for solutions. Her interview points to her desire for solutions with guarantees (of progress and, perhaps, relief from guilt over her complicity) in order to maintain her ontological security which is threatened by the encounters she experienced throughout the program. The challenge of post-critical approaches to these types of learning encounters therefore is how to design programs that allow participants to resist the need for fixing that is driven by the affective desire to feel good and short-circuiting any experience of epistemic uncertainty. While the above begins to hint at the challenges in facilitating a post-critical approach to transformation through a north-south mobility experience, the four remaining participant interview summaries complement and contradict these findings as evident below.   Will  Will is an African American man who attends a university in the US where he studies science and languages.  He came to this program in Brazil with a very high level of Portuguese. Will wanted to study abroad again after previous experience with a different study abroad program and wanted to do it in a Portuguese speaking country this time, while also learning about social justice issues and how local organizations approach them. He wants to become a medical doctor and potentially work for Doctors without borders or a similar global physician program. For his Community Development Project, he spent three weeks in Manaus, Amazonas in an effort to learn about Indigenous medicine and Indigenous knowledge. Will said that his  - 63 -  learning goals (and subsequently what he learned) shifted during the program from wanting to learn about how NGOs work to a consideration of  “how can we be supportive of these movements and how do I interact with these movements and the problems they’re trying to fix or they’re dealing with, how am I placed within the context of those problems in society as a whole”.  This response is significant and demonstrates a shift towards working together differently and in ways that might not be driven by a need to ‘feel good’ or fix. Through the program, he began to explore his responsibility for educating himself and others about issues even if he might not belong to the community or group directly facing its implications. This shift echoes Camila’s realizations of interconnectedness amongst struggles facing Latinx communities in the States and Indigenous and Afro-brazilian communities in Brazil. Will did feel like he was transformed through the experience, and I will illustrate exactly how he documents the new sense of openness to other peoples and knowledge systems which is present in his reflections. Will told me that he was “very open now” , to which I asked if he meant in terms of religion and spirituality? He clarified that he was open in terms of  “religion and spirituality, how we are interconnected with other people, with the world, how people perceive this connectedness, and where we came from and how we relate to one another and to nature”.  His self-identification and claim of this new openness is evidenced in the shifting relationships to self, others and knowledge that he walks me through during the course of our interview and is supported by my observations. Will discusses the nature of his transformation and sums up how he sees it by saying, “I think my awareness of social issues and how I consider myself to be part of the problem, how I think about myself dealing with it has changed...Definitely my awareness of differences in people and how we can not value and devalue differences and not demonize the people who are different from us, that has changed”. He adds that his career goals of working as a doctor in underserved communities through organizations like MSF and PIH have been reinforced but with a commitment to do so in a role that is not just providing services but working together towards something better. Not only does Will feel that he has been transformed, he is able to articulate what he thinks was required of him and of the program to make that happen. He talks of an ‘unloading process’. For context, Will  - 64 -  completed his community development project in an Indigenous Satere community near Manaus, a community that embodied a completely different cosmology to anything he had ever encountered before. From his experience, he learned that, “When you’re going to visit these places and you’re going into these communities, you have to unload all of the things that you are bringing with you like where you come from, what you think you need. You have to consciously unpack, like unload yourself, drop it off, leave it at the door, don’t bring it in with you and it’s a really hard process I learned when I was there for three weeks, to do that...so whenever you would have these negative thoughts like they don’t have this, they don’t have that, I would think, well, do I actually need it? Is it necessary? Why do I even feel like I need it? Is it because I’ve had it my entire life or is it because I actually do need it? Why do I think this way of living is wrong? Is it because it doesn’t follow the way I have been living or is it because there’s some negative side that I’m not really understanding? So it’s like a constant questioning of your own thought processes and how you’re approaching a situation.”  Will is able to understand that his way(s) of knowing, being and relating in/to the world are products of his environment, history and culture and that for him to really be present to what the communities who have invited him in are offering, he has to bracket a lot of what he knows and wants during his time there. He felt transformed by the openness that he was able to experience, and at the same time he notes that this very willingness and effort he put towards being open was necessary for a transformation to take place. This demonstrates a shifting relationship to knowledge wherein Will recognized the need to interrogate his own desires and thought processes and to look at what he knew from a position he had never held before. His questioning of his own thought processes and approaches to the situations he encountered in Brazil is not characterized by a preoccupation with maintaining his identity, innocence or desire to feel or look good.  Will is able to articulate the shifts he experienced in his relationship to knowledge, and he is able to highlight how this carried over to his relationship with other peoples. He thought that that was because, “ ...their sense of community is really strong there, and not just in what they shared- and they shared everything- like ‘where is the one spoon that we use to eat’ to if you offer anybody any food ‘hey would you like a cookie?’ it’s an automatic invitation for everybody in the community to have one and it’s gone in like three seconds, they share...  - 65 -  it was like I was automatically a part of everyone’s family. And there was some really deep relationships were formed over the course of a week” Despite his ability to link the Satere aldeia’s conceptualization of community and his invitation to it to the development of meaningful relationships, Will also spent some time in his interview making note of the barriers that he found limited his ability to form sustained relationships with the people he met through the program. Like Camila, he also found that the deepest relationships that he formed were with the other participants in the program; however, he also felt that he had been able to form some with members of Satere community he stayed with. He provided some insight into the barriers to forming relationship beyond the oft-cited logistical constraints of time and language. He argued that, “I think it’s more on the person who is visiting the community to try to overcome those barriers or to try to make the relationship reciprocal than it is the community that you’re visiting. And so I think I did pretty well during my visit to the community to not just take, take, take from them and try to be with them and tell a little about my culture and share myself with them...There were definitely moments where I was caught off guard like I would say ‘...I went to New Orleans and it was really cool and it was a big city’ and they were like, ‘what you went to the city, what was it like, what is it there?’ And so, the knowledge that they stay in that community, this tiny little...the few acres of land that they have and they stay there their entire lives was like quite shocking to me, and something I couldn’t conceive of doing and what I was doing they couldn’t conceive of either and so it was just like this very, this kind of thing that was, there was kind of a break...different realities”. He is clearly aware of the huge task of relating across difference that was required of him as a visitor in the Satere community and the importance, therefore, of being present with them, sharing (about) himself and attempting to build relationships across their very different realities. It is clear that not everyone is prepared or able to do this work and Will’s reflections about how important it is to establishing relationships (and consequently opening up the potential for transformation) highlights how crucial it is for any North-South mobility experience to support participants in practicing the vulnerability and epistemic openness that is needed for this relating across difference to be possible.   - 66 -   Will was able to succinctly articulate how his time in the Satere community provoked him to question his understandings of wealth and poverty and his relationship to knowledge: “I think my idea of poverty has definitely changed from just kind of considering material wealth to also definitely considering the sense of community you have and your connectedness with other people. And also wealth, so I just saw those people as incredibly poor...I don’t even know how to...from the general state of the houses themselves…(long pause)...I don’t even know what...like they don’t have much at all. But then they were like ‘yeah but we don’t need anything, we don’t need 4K HD Tv flatscreens 70 inch tvs hanging on our wall, we don’t need air conditioning, we don’t need fancy suits and cars, we just need each other’. And so I was like ‘wow, this is such a rich community, while being poor’. And so it kind of changed my ideas of who am I to go in and tell them that they’re poor if they don’t even see themselves as living in- as being poor. Why am I trying to impose my ideas of poverty onto them?” In this selected quote, Will reflects on becoming aware of what he understood as poverty and how this stemmed from one worldview; it also demonstrates his process of shifting to allow for other understandings of poverty and wealth to be valid and is evidence of a shift in knowledge that allows for epistemic uncertainty. Despite Will’s questioning of his ideas (and labeling) of poverty, he admits that: “I don’t know how it will affect my view because they definitely can’t do the things that I can.”  Although he is open to relating to knowledge differently and open to different conceptualizations and embodiments of poverty and wealth, Will is still conflicted by his desire to continue to strive for success as it has been defined within his epistemological frame and culture. Throughout his time in the Satere community, Will was repeatedly confronted with the labels and sense-making his epistemology offered him, but he was also given the space in the program to begin to question those as the only or best way of understanding and knowing. I include the example below (and I include it in its entirety) because it is a rich example of his wrestling with his own convictions and at the same time attempting to be open, vulnerable and present to the community members who were hosting him.  “So I come from a very strong Christian background, and a Christian background that is not very open I guess you could say to new ideas...so...I started to feel a little friction in  - 67 -  the program or course because Christianity has done so many bad things in the past and so hearing it talked about in these contexts as ‘Christians have been so oppressive in the past’ kind of was like ‘uhhhhh I don’t like it, I don’t like it, I don’t like it, I don’t want to discuss it, I don’t want to talk about it’ but then I started to interrupt, to question myself and be like why am I having these reactions, what is this, how do I think about these certain religions or beliefs that are contrary to my own beliefs in Christianity. And so then I keep on questioning and it keeps on happening and I keep on being uncomfortable. And then I get to the Indigenous community, and Sahu doesn’t really give me a choice, he’s the page there, he doesn’t really give me a choice, he’s just like ‘Come and I’m going to do a defumacao’...and so I’m like ‘oh, okay, great’, and so I go...and I sat down and he started speaking but in the Satere language...and he had this burning bril, I don’t know if it’s bark, wood, roots, I don’t know, something, and so he’s moving it around, saying some stuff, moving my arms up and going up and down my body and he was just saying some stuff. And then it ended and he sat down and he started talking to me about what he sensed and what he knew about me now and I was like, ‘this is so weird’, I don’t like, during the process he was doing it I was like, this is, this is like some- I don’t know. And so, I realized afterwards when he explained to me that he was protecting me it was like a protection ceremony, so he was getting rid of all the negative energies, giving me positive energies and then kind of blessing, I would say, my path in the future like protecting me mentally, physically, spiritually, all of this stuff. So at the end of it I was like “[Will], you’re stupid, why were you thinking this was like a devil worship or something like that?”...Yeah, so I was very uncomfortable during this defumacao...I didn’t know what it was and because of my strong Christian background, anything that was not Christian was devil worship, not devil worship, but not good. And so having this Christian background that’s constantly being challenged and then going into this place and having this experience with a belief system and spirituality that’s like, separate from Christianity sort of, made me very uncomfortable. But at the same time, I don’t know if you knew that this community, this Satere community is Seventh Day Adventist- like everybody there. So it’s a Christian community and I went to Church with them, I worshipped with them at the same time that they believe all these different things.”   - 68 -  This excerpt demonstrates some of the key themes emerging from the research. It shows Will’s experience of discomfort but also how facing that discomfort allowed him to open up to other knowledge systems and be able to value their practices and to hold different (and potentially conflicting) knowledge systems at the same time; it affirms the potential for North to South mobility experiences to open up possibilities for cognitive justice. While the theme of discomfort runs throughout the participants’ narratives, this quote emphasizes Will’s ability to begin to question why he is having these reactions of discomfort in the face of encountering peoples and practices that adhere to a knowledge system unlike the one that frames his worldview and his being. Will’s ability to trace his own reactions to people, places and events through the program and his reflection on how his epistemology shaped his interpretations was most evident in his time spent in the Satere community, as some of the previous excerpts from his interview have illustrated. Initially, he focused predominantly on what was lacking and the inferior living conditions and quality: “When I first got here I only focused on ‘oh they don’t have this, oh they don’t have this, oh I don’t have air conditioning, I’m sweating while I’m sleeping, ah there’s an ant house in my house’. It was all focused on the negative and what they didn’t have and it took me quite a while for me to start to understand what was different about the community because it was really a community, a very strong community. But I also still want to have air conditioning, I also still want to be able to afford to travel and see different places and meet different people and so there’s kind of like, well, I want something from each part of life, and I want them to meet, and I want it to be perfect.” As Will relays his thought process, he documents how he consciously began to identify how he saw one way of living as superior and was able to trace his efforts to view the community otherwise. However, he brings up the ongoing conflict he has in still wanting the comforts he knows and is accustomed to; even when he was able to disrupt his thinking about inferiority and superiority in black and white terms, he found there was a complexity involved in working through the questioning of these ideas. He found that “this way of life was superior in one way, but then mine was superior in a different way and then they were both inferior in other ways...it became more nuanced...versus just this is better and this is bad”. His attention to narratives of superiority and inferiority and continuing shifts in thinking demonstrate an awareness of the  - 69 -  partial nature of his understanding of people, society and the world and the incommensurability of the different knowledge systems he encountered. His relationship to knowledge and his shift towards more openness thus manifest in his relationships to others as well.  Will grappled with how his worldview was being challenged by the program and in tracing his shifts in thinking and behaviour he noticed a source of conflict in his continuing desire for the comforts he was accustomed to. This conflict led him to articulate some of the tension he felt in considering his complicity in the systems of harm he was learning about. Will spoke about feeling overwhelmed by the inequities he witnessed and by his own privilege and felt that the impact of his actions was limited in the face of the enormity of the problems he was becoming aware of.  “I can get kind of extreme in my thinking at times. So I think about I don’t know just a famine, people starving, not having access to food, people who don’t have access to healthcare and they have like cancer and they’re dying and they need money, and then I go to Cinquenta Sabores and I buy a 13 reais ice cream or- or I go to Walmart, or not even Walmart, I go to a store and buy a 60 reais shirt...How am I relating to these issues that are going on? And so I can get kind of extreme in my thinking and be like ‘I can’t have any of this, I need to donate my money to all of these organizations, I need to go volunteer with them now, I need to quit school’ and it can get kind of extreme and so how do I, as a global citizen, who is committed to combating these issues, how do I justify going out and spending 120 reais on a dinner when I could give like 3$ and someone else could have a meal for a month.” Similar to Camila’s reaction to her thoughts on complicity, Will is driven by a desire to feel good. To consider his actions as wrapped up in the inequity facing others is damaging to that self-image. This is not a personal critique or a surprising finding as participation in North-South mobility experiences is often imbued with narratives of benevolence. Andreotti (2015) highlights how “the potential equality of the Other as well as the awareness of our dependency and complicity in their material impoverishment significantly threatens our self-image and perceived (pleasurable) entitlements to intervene in the world as ‘change makers’” (p. 225). The attention to how participants interact with their complicity is not in an effort to squash good intentions or unmask ‘good people’ to reveal a more sinister interior, but rather to highlight how participants, like Will, are invited in North-South mobility experiences like the one studied, to begin to  - 70 -  confront how they are related to what they previously might have viewed as ahistorical inequities of chance. As Charania (2011) reminds us, “We often misdirect our outrage at suffering to a preoccupation with symptoms that make us feel good, benevolent and charitable but that do not get us closer to understanding the causes and more systemic and transformative approaches to oppression that implicate us in difficult and uncomfortable ways”. Will’s narrative throughout his interview demonstrates a desire to move beyond mere preoccupation with symptoms and to face rather than turn away from the difficult and uncomfortable realizations. Like Camila, he acknowledges systemic complicity and notes a shift in how he sees himself as personally innocent and/or complicit.  In addition to Will’s wrestle with his complicity and how this shifted how he viewed himself in relation to what he was learning, Will also noted how his identity, and in particular his blackness, played a key role in how he related to many of the people and situations he encountered; “Me being black, has also influenced my time here as well...it kind of makes everything more personal for me because if I lived here I could be experiencing some of these same issues and so it makes everything a bit more personal a little closer, closer to home, closer to the heart”. Specifically, Will found that the experiences in the favela20 were particularly evocative for him, and he was pressed with the question of why most of the people who make up the favela were black. Will’s experience of shifts in how he saw himself, how he related to others and to knowledge was therefore not confined to his experience in the aldeia in Manaus but rather an ongoing part of his experience in Brazil. Overall, Will’s interview documented the greatest shift in dispositions and willingness to explore how his knowledge about himself, others, the world                                                  20 A favela is a term which “designates spontaneous settlements, all types of informal, illegal occupations, invasions, slums, and squatter settlements in Brazil. The Portuguese word favela characterizes different urban settlements inhabited by the poor” (Hutchison, 2009).  Throughout our time in Rio we stayed in a convent in Santa Teresa, located on the top of a hill, in between the city proper and the convent were various favelas housed that climbed the sides of the hill, in order to get to and from the city each time ran the risk of entering a favela, a risk that came to fruition for the academic director and four out of five of the Social Innovation and Community Development cohort participants. Their uber driver was unfamiliar with the neighborhood and so took the direct route down the hill that Google Maps offered him. He entered the favela and immediately realised he had done so as armed men began  to surround the car. He turned the lights in the car off and stuck his hands out the window. There was a back and forth between the men and the driver and eventually, in Portuguese, one of the men said ‘go with God’ and the driver crept through the winding favela streets with the Americans in the car holding their breaths in silence until the popped out the other side. This moment is commented upon by the students in their interviews and was clearly impactful on their perceptions of favelas.  - 71 -  and his relations in it are not neutral, universal or innocent. Will engaged with the invitation to examine his desires, investments and assumptions and seemed to move from wanting to make a difference to questioning his sense of self and his complicity and asking how he could better be in relation with those who are actively struggling against the systems from which he benefits and participates in. It is clear that the experiences of racialization and ‘being Black’ both in Brazil and the US have influenced this narrative (and others) and might explain certain insights and emotional resonances that bear on the ways in which this participant’s shifting relationships to self, other and knowledge became characterized by a development of a disposition of openness. Trilokekar and Kukar (2011) show how racialization inevitably shapes students’ international study abroad experiences. However, the narratives expressed by these participants are included in this thesis not for me to analyse and definitively say what they mean but rather to interpret by showing the recurrence of similar attachments that maintain epistemic certainty and ontological security within them.    James James is a white-Canadian studying Physics and Globalization Studies. He attended an IB World School for his high school education. He was interested in learning about colonialism and environmental issues as well as improving his Portuguese. James did not arrive with any Portuguese but was able to get by by the end of the program. For his Community Development Project, he stayed in a fishing village on the Ceara coast called Fleixeiras where he spent time at Barraca das Algas, a restaurant, community centre for environmental education and macroalgae production centre.  While Will and Camila were definitive in saying they had and hadn’t been transformed through the program in Brazil (respectively), James said both yes and no. He felt that the program was transformative but that he did not feel it was as transformative for him as it might have been for other participants because of his previous educational exposure to some of the same issues raised in this program. Similar to Camila, James felt that he had already learned much of the content that was being conveyed to him. Also like Camila, James relied on examples of other educational experiences which he found he could confidently say were transformative and compared them to this experience. James talked about his experience attending a United World College for high school where he was exposed to people of various backgrounds and  - 72 -  cultures for an extended period of time. In articulating this comparison he was able to state clearly that he thought transformation requires  “interpersonal relationships with people from other cultures. I feel like the program here lacks as many opportunities to make interpersonal relationships-especially with peers, with people of our own age, for an extended period of time”.  The ability to experience transformation as a result of the program and its abilities to foster meaningful interpersonal relationships was a note that came through a lot of James’ interview as well as others’. In terms of the impact that James’ learning in Brazil will have, he was unsure about how it would impact him going forward because he admitted that  “It’s going to make me even more critical of the structures of violence which I benefit from and participate in but at the same time, I don’t know if I wasn’t already aware of these systems”.  This suggests that merely knowing about structural violence or other systemic issues does not necessarily correspond with people experiencing a transformation, and again reiterates the importance of the distinction between systemic and personal complicity and innocence. James’ interview was wholly characterized by his desire to have developed more meaningful relationships during his time in Brazil. He felt that being able to share and understand each other’s narratives and lived experiences was essential to establishing rapport and that this required having open dispositions of engagement towards other people. There is a clear desire felt by the participants, and especially James, for an education that prepares them with the tools to enact and embody such dispositions. James stated that he believed interpersonal relationships were the biggest contributor to transformative education. However, in reflecting on the nature of the program, he felt that he was not able to repeatedly interact with the same group of people consistently, thus, limiting his ability to form relationships outside of structured learning environments. He noted that it was easier to learn about issues facing other people from meeting and developing a rapport and relationship than merely hearing about it from a secondary source. To make his point, James stated: “I always felt like this program would be a million times better if there were Brazilian students who participated in it too, for sure, that is what I thought probably from day one...I think that this program would be a million times better if it involved a long term exposure to people so those interpersonal relationships can be made.”  - 73 -  I agree that de-centring the American/visitor experience in the learning encounter by designing programs that do not continue to hierarchize the relationship between visitor and host as learner and object of learning should include ‘host community members’ in the learning as suggested as a core tenet of Fair Trade Study Abroad. However, I agree with an inclusion of local and international participants in the learning environments (which was hinted at in the time spent at MST and Manaus) on the basis of reciprocal learning and not, what seems to be alluded to in the quotations above, on the basis of instrumentalizing relationships and ‘Others’ for the self-actualization and knowledge attainment of the Northern participants. The uninterrupted desire for ‘authentic’ relationships with ‘others’ is indicative of the trope of using ‘others’ bodies as sources for learning in north-south mobility experiences. This focus on interpersonal relationships is key to James’ interpretation of transformation and a major requirement, in his view, for substantial learning of a transformative nature to take place. His view on transformation and his reflections that convey his desire for more consistent time spent with people whom he could potentially get to know sheds some light on his hesitancy to state outright whether or not he felt that he had been transformed through the program.  In the interview, I asked James about how he felt connected to the struggles facing some of the people working in community organizations we had met with, for example, those in the favela we visited, despite the brevity of our encounter. He said: “I don’t know if I feel connected to [people in favelas]. For me, the idea of connection is either it plays a day to day role in my life or it’s something that I feel like I’m contributing to a part of that situation and I don’t know if that’s, I don’t feel either of those things. I don’t know to what extent I’m trying to ignore the realities in which my day to day life is supported by that violence but it’s one of the things that I feel more unrelated to I guess.” This comment illustrates some of the pervasive distances felt between participants and the communities they visited in spite of some curricular attention devoted to reflecting on participant complicities in systems that produce poverty in favelas. It is clear that some awareness of complicity affected many of the participants and how they saw themselves in relation to others. James also considered his complicity and demonstrated some of the opposing thoughts he had about it that were provoked by the program:  - 74 -  “The systems that I use in my daily life, you know the clothes that I wear, the food that I eat, a lot of times are prepared and delivered using systems of violence, using problematic labour sources, using problematic resource extraction, using- there’s a lot of destruction going on just so that I can live the way that I do. And at the same time, you know, a lot of people then turn around and say, ‘well you’re living that way, how can you expect it to change?’ You know... while my life benefits to some extent, from these systems of inequality it doesn’t mean that I can’t want to be part of the solution to change it, and for others as well.”  James demonstrates in the quote above a similar frustration to Camila and Will with being so entrenched in the system that they are unsure of where to begin to change it, that the way in which they live their lives is so built on harmful systems that to consider something else entirely seems an impossible task. Beyond personal complicity, James also brings in a consideration of the complicity of the program and the paradoxical nature of their presence in Brazil: “We spend more money for a group of five students than entire school districts in Brazil sometimes over the course of four months...during my community development project, my stipend for three weeks was two minimum monthly salaries in Brazil so...We are, as a program, committed to doing very little to try to change our participation in the systems of violence that we criticize.” James, like Camila and Will, shared his thoughts on how the program seemed to present the participants with a variety of problems but limited tools to begin to address them. This unity and strength of their concerns adds weight to the perspective that this is a perceived pedagogical limitation of the program, and any like it, which faces the challenge of reaching its goals of global justice literacy and of a transformation that is existential and political. James detailed how he was: “...still trying to debate whether or not a lot of this experience has been, not disaster tourism, but just coming here to see the conditions in which people live, and I feel most problematically we’re coming here to look at the problems and a lot of solutions to problems haven’t been discussed...a lot of the discussions about the de facto sort of existence of, as Bill likes to call it, an apartheid state in Brazil, like we talked about this problem a lot but we didn’t talk at really much at length how problems like that can be  - 75 -  addressed or solved or what mechanisms can be used to dismantle those realities and change them.” Again, the notion that the participants were overwhelmed with being presented with a myriad of problems and very little concrete solutions emerges. James makes an astute remark to follow up on why he sees this presentation of problems as worrisome and frustrating:  “Being aware doesn’t give you access to opportunities to live less colonially”.  This succinctly sums up some of the reasons why participants are so defensive of their complicity and so frustrated with the lack of tools for change or opportunities for action or resistance to the systems they are becoming aware of. James’ assertion that awareness does not necessarily lead to action or change highlights a need that has yet to be filled by the current program selected in this case study: a need to engender a reaction to the way the problems are presented that operates to bridge the gap between knowledge and action- not in a way that promotes surface level solutions or solutions even as an attainable goal, but in a way that foster experimentation without promises of betterment, security or progress. This highlights, again, the challenges in both articulating and designing a north-south mobility experience characterized by a post-critical approach: participants are coming to the program looking for outcomes associated with the critical (ie. ‘give me the knowledge to act’) and which reaffirm their roles as benevolent changemakers. Discourse surrounding international service learning and study abroad, as well as wider dominant discourses in higher education, encourage participants to be teleologically expectant, thus shaping and limiting possibilities for transformation. James’ reflections on his frustrations with being shown so many problems and so few actionable solutions and the conflict he articulates about learning from this perspective brings the question of what action is expected of the participants in light of their learning. It also points to the need to create curriculum and pedagogy that allows participants to cope with the paradoxes and contradictions they encounter without necessarily fulfilling the desire ‘to fix’.  Maria Maria is another young Latina woman who studied Psychology at an American University. She was seeking personal development and growth throughout her time in the program. She was hoping that the trip would be a turn around and help her to grow and develop as a person while learning about other peoples and cultures. Her expectations and intentions  - 76 -  going in were very much framed through personal development and the learning outcomes typically associated with traditional service learning. She initially wanted to study abroad in South Africa but her program was cancelled and so last minute she decided to enroll in the program in Brazil even though she didn’t know anything about it. Maria did not arrive with fluent Portuguese, but she is from the Dominican Republic and speaks Spanish at home which proved to be very useful in picking up her language skills. For her Community Development Project, she stayed with a mental health organization, Movimento de Saude Mental Comunitaria in Bom Jardim, a favela in the city of Fortaleza.  In exploring Maria’s interview responses in relation to the research question which addresses how participants’ relationships to self, others and knowledge shifted, it is clear that although she did identify with being transformed by the experience, the type of transformation that she experienced was one intimately connected to personal development rather than the existential shifts I was predominantly focused on exploring in this research. Maria discussed how the experience was transformational for her in terms of attitudes, independence and a sense of self. She stated that,  “There’s just so much you don’t know until you actually go out and experience and get to know other people and learn their lifestyles and the world that they live in on a daily basis. It made me much more conscious of others and sensitive to others, like who they are and where they come from...I feel like coming here, I was able to find myself again, which is really awesome and it makes me excited to go back home.” Maria expressed wholeheartedly how transformative the experience had been in her reasserting her own voice and independence, and her responses demonstrated again how the individual understandings of what transformation could look like that each of the participants held significantly shaped the experience of that transformation. For instance, with Camila and James, their references to past experiences of transformative educational encounters were what they measured this experience by. For Maria, her decision to come to Brazil in the first place was strongly associated with a quest for personal growth and development, and her conversation with me reflected a sense of satisfaction in achieving that.  Maria was the only one who did not choose someone associated with the SIT program (either fellow participant or staff) as the most meaningful relationship that she developed  - 77 -  throughout her time in Brazil. She stated that it was the local youth with whom she felt the most connected. She told me of how she had a conversation with three Bom Jardim residents,  “and the question came up of ‘have you ever robbed, have you ever stolen anything?’ And I was like, yeah when I was a little kid or whatever. And my friend was like, well try going four days without food in your house, you desperately need food, that was the one time I robbed. I was like... yeah…” She was able to acknowledge that although she found her relationships with the local youth to be the most meaningful, their contexts were immensely different, “because I haven’t had to go four days from eating. I haven’t had to rob for my family or I haven’t had to do dangerous jobs just to get a little bit of money. I haven’t had to recycle bottles to get some change, I haven’t had to stop myself from being in a relationship because the money that I make is not enough for my family and my girlfriend.” She was sensitive to the fact that these relationships required that she relate across difference. Her approach was one that considered how she could have just as easily been born into that situation. Her awareness of this barrier to relating and determination to move through it speaks to the need for North-South mobility experiences to prepare learners for how to do just that.  While Maria acknowledged the barriers in fully relating across difference, she felt that her identity played a role in how she related to the people she met in Brazil, both because of her origins in the Global South and her latina identity. “Well, I come from a third world country too, so a lot of the problems that I saw happening here I related back to my country, to my home country, the Dominican Republic. And so it helped me be more accepting, more understanding, it definitely makes me want to go back to the Dominican Republic and do the same thing I did here. It makes me think about the oppression that latinos have in the United States.” Although Maria felt that she was able to relate to the Brazilians she met, and reflect on how her experience as a Latina and as an American shaped her experience in Brazil, in the context of the research question about how her relationships to knowledge, others and self were shifted, challenged or reinforced, Maria’s interview suggests that her views were predominantly reinforced.   - 78 -  While Camila and Will demonstrated some grappling with the narratives of superiority and inferiority that they were presented with and were cognizant of their own modes of thinking throughout their experiences in Brazil, thus demonstrating the possibility for this type of education to challenge and disrupt ways of relating to others and relating to knowledge, Maria demonstrated how these programs can also serve to reinforce those very same narratives. She reflected on our group visit to the Satere community and how they ate crocodile as opposed to chicken, which in her opinion would be better, and highlighted how there were some things she admitted she simply could not comprehend within her worldview. For instance,  “Some things I can’t wrap my head around still, like I understand that that’s just how they are and this is the life they’ve been living and it works for them, but me, who’s not from here, like I can’t, because I know there’s so much more...In the sense that I know that fourteen year old girl can go to high school and she can go to college and she can have a career for herself and her life doesn’t just stop at having a child and a husband, a ‘husband’, a sixteen year old, because that’s basically what her life is going to be like, that’s it. There’s so much more. I was thinking, like, maybe she doesn’t want more but maybe that’s because she hasn’t experienced.” Her insistence that there was so much more highlighted her commitment to a certain idea of progress, development, and individual success. Many of the other participants also voiced shock about some of these images that they associate with poverty and/or a lack of education. In some cases, they were aware of their reactions and saw them as results of their lens and worldview. Maria demonstrates that she knows that she sees the situation as an outsider and admits an inability to fully understand, however, she is unwilling to compromise or hold other possible stances on what ‘a good life’ could be. Her views on her life choices and circumstances are reinforced in contrast to the reality that she views in the aldeia.  Later on in the interview, Maria noted how Brazilians seem to look up to Americans and so I asked her if she had a similarly positive view of America given her American citizenship and her exposure to Brazilian culture and people. Her response was: “I feel like America is a pretty good country. We have everything. You have resources in America that people here don’t have. It’s not as easy for them to do a foreign exchange program as it is for us, like our universities offer it for us, all you have to do is maintain your grades. That’s not that easy here. Let’s talk about how hard it is to get a visa just to  - 79 -  travel to the US...We have a lot of resources. I don’t think they have even half as many scholarships as we do which is a lot...I know that although America is not Brazil, America does have many problems that Brazil has, they just handle them different, or they’re not as serious because our government isn’t as corrupt, even though he is. It’s a bit more just...People would ask me if I would live here, like Brazilians, and I would say yeah, that was before I figured out why they would look at me like I was crazy. I definitely wouldn’t live here, but I would stay here for a longer time, but not just to be a tourist and to enjoy the city, more so to keep learning about it and to continue to understand the problems and why it’s so hard to come up with solutions.” The quote above demonstrates how Maria’s views on global development, international inequities and cultural progress were reinforced by what she saw and observed throughout the program. Like Camila, Maria spends some time reflecting on the inequities she sees in higher education; however, she does not draw the connection between the disparities in resource access and history, power, and patterns of domination or exploitation. She explains the differences she notes in terms of Brazilian corruption and continues to see the US as the ideal to be attained and strived for. Her interview is interesting in further demonstrating how the extent to which a post-critical transformation is possible rests significantly on the willingness of each individual participant to engage with academic and experiential learning components of the course as well as the learner’s biography. It also suggests the need for North-South mobility experiences to include a consideration of the diversity of the backgrounds and intentions of the participants to ensure a curriculum that is inviting and accessible to all. Maria had no qualms expressing that the program as she experienced it was ethical and meaningful; however, her interpretations of these concepts were located predominantly within a traditional orientation that was fundamentally grounded in epistemic certainty. The experiences do not necessarily lead Maria to question her ideas of progress, wealth, development, and inequity or how they structure her cognitive, affective and relational investments. Her ontological security is reaffirmed through the learning experience and reassertion of narratives and desires that correspond with her understanding of how the world works and her unwavering commitment to the ways of knowing that inform it.       - 80 -  Jay Jay studied Anthropology and arrived to the program with a very high level of Portuguese. His parents both immigrated to the US in their youth but his extended family remain in India where he goes back to once every year. He wanted to learn about how non-profits work in practice. Jay did not find that the program was transformative for him. He justified his response by saying that, “the way that I think about things and go about my life is built on a very solid foundation of what I wanted to do and I don’t really see anything changing that...I feel like it’s given me a lot of tools and like really valuable lessons about how to go about like into the future but as far as transformed goes, I don’t think so.” Jay did not identify with being transformed because of a commitment to a worldview that he believed was unshakeable and foundational in how he lived his life. He elaborated in his interview on how he felt that the goals of the program contradicted his personal goals at times and in this way his answers shed light on the first and second research question in inextricable ways. His views, knowledge system and modes of relating to others were challenged but did not necessarily shift. He did not identify with being transformed because he felt committed to his current understanding of the world and self.  At several different instances during his interview, Jay noted that he did not want to compromise his sense of self and his identity:  “How can I stay ethical on a moment by moment basis and I think at some point if you fixate on that too for too long you lose the...genuineness...You start to  lose your own sense of identity and I think that’s not very genuine if you start to lose- you have to be the person that you are.”  This commitment to the person that you are, your understanding of self and your worldview was something that came across very strongly in Jay’s narrative; he was married to one worldview that really privileged the power of the individual, the power of education in alleviating poverty and the power of love and joy. I do not think good can come without a commitment to love and joy, but Jay was resistant to considering relating to others and to knowledge in ways that critically interrogated his complicity at a depth that threatened his self-image. This is something that is to be expected in any education that offers a disruption to worldviews and begins to hint at what is a main takeaway and conclusion from this research: the extent to which a post-critical North-South mobility experience can be transformative (in the  - 81 -  sense that I have articulated) is largely dependent on the individual and their capacity to engage with other knowledge systems that threaten the certainty of their worldviews. The resistance could also be a belief in systemic innocence and personal complicity, a position from which “many people resist when starting to engage with analyses of injustice as it triggers the subconscious, fear of personal blame” and illustrates a different narrative that points back towards a recurring affective investment in innocence.  Jay’s interview touches on the tension between the archetypes of participants that either become entrenched in the problem or become fascinated with the pursuit and hopefulness of (symptom) solutions. He felt frustrated with being presented with the systemic roots of the problems he saw playing out before him and rather than dwelling on the frustration or feeling of being overwhelmed, chose to focus on the power of individuals which emerged as foundational to his worldview.  “There’s no reason to worry, really, once you come to that conclusion I think a lot of things click into place, like the gears kind of come together and everything starts melding. Once you realize that there’s not really anything in this world to stress out about, I think that opens a lot of doors because- that’s one thing that I worry about  this program, I will say that, is that in some ways we’re just kind of just exposed to all these problems and like of course that’s really important, it’s like becoming more aware of the problems and widening your perspective in that way, but at the same time it’s important not to be overwhelmed by all of that and feel like you’re too small to tackle any of those issues or anything like that. I think it’s important to realize that everything that you see around in the world was done by people just like you and so they can be undone and they can be made better by people just like you too in a sense, that’s my belief.” Jay presents this thread that was so obvious in each of the participants’ interviews: a frustration with being presented with such an array of problems and few possible solutions or actions to improve them. He does not find that the discomfort that this produces is productive and instead notes that it evokes guilt and inertia. “I think it’s important not to get too defensive because I think it leads to a lot of guilt and I think that guilt can lead to other problems kind of like I was saying where you start to feel too overwhelmed. Of course it’s important to realize what your actions mean in the context of others, but when you start to fixate on that and that’s the only thing that you think about rather than how  - 82 -  it could be ameliorated, then I think there can be some problems there then too because you get caught up in what Bill had kind of talked about as far as cycles of guilt and stuff like that. So it kind of seems like it’s a fine balance, like of course you have to realize the problems that you’re facing, the problems that are present and everything, and your place with respect to those problems, but fixating on them too much can also lead to worse problems.” Jay notes that there is a balance to be found in educating oneself about the problems and fixating on them. This is a balance that North-South mobility experiences can strive for in their curricular objectives and that sees discomfort as generative in allowing for learning to emerge through encountering difficult knowledge, and yet not seeing discomfort as an end in and of itself. Rather, discomfort can provoke transformative possibilities, but experiencing discomfort is not sufficient for transformation to occur. The balance that Jay speaks of is a delicate one as it is important that participants of North-South mobility experiences engage with the complexities of the nature of this type of education through a situated analysis but also move beyond analysis and work towards different engagement.  “I don’t think our mission in this world- that is one thing that I think is a little bit different between like the program goals and kind of my personal goals- I think the program really, their main motive is to get young people thinking about these issues in a different environment, but my goal is kind of like...like that’s just the first step kind of, you start to become aware of other people’s issues and widen your perspective...but...I think like at some points of the program we maybe were a bit too much like focusing on every single little thing in the context of coloniality and slavery...like that was something that wasn’t working for all of us, and it’s hard to argue against, almost, like it’s hard to bring up because it’s like ‘well why shouldn’t we be thinking about it in everything’ but you know it’s hard because I think of life as very, very simple like you should do, like you should help other people, like of course having those little things, like you want to help people and you want to be nice and you should follow love and truth and all of these different values, I think that’s like, life is super simple in that way, but, like, of course in an academic setting we make everything so complicated, and I think in some point for good reasons but like often times we get like so lost in the rhetoric and this kind of academic path that we kind of forget about the mission in the beginning. We get so caught up in analysing everything in different perspectives...we do get lost in the rhetoric  - 83 -  and we feel like by talking- I think talking about issues is important of course, but like just talking about issues, isn’t solving any issues, kind of, at some point, it really is a first step, I’m not saying we should just go about, everyone should start solving problems all of a sudden and helping others, you have to talk about things, like that’s the way you learn but if that’s the only thing you’re doing then I think it’s hard.” What Jay seems to be getting at here is how he feels that by committing to an analytic perspective and being concerned with how people’s realities connect to theories that emphasize the impacts of colonization, he is not as easily able to go forward with his worldview which is premised on kindness, truth and love. In seemingly resisting some of the complexity of the issues he encounters and faces during the program, Jay opts instead to assert shared ‘universal’ values, potentially reinscribing his learning encounters to make sense within the worldview he has developed. Despite how he articulates this concern, I do think he cuts to an issue that any North-South mobility experience (that aims to create relationships that do not fall prey to the dominant narratives) must take seriously: we cannot get stuck in the talking about issues. Jay continues; “As far as political correctness goes and all of this kind of stuff that we don’t do anything then, you know? Like if all you’re doing is making up vocabulary about how to talk about an issue rather than how to go about fixing the issues, I feel like maybe it isn’t the best way sometimes.”  In a critical approach, this statement might be perceived as right in that participants would be compelled to action through the learning encounter and that talking is not enough. However, in a post-critical approach, the desire to action, the desire to fix and to solve, and the desire to reassert an ability to ‘feel good’ and accomplish self-actualization through a continued identification with the role of global changemaker are all centred and considered. The impulse to act/help/fix represents a circuitous affective investment in teleologic thinking. The framing of educational encounters in teleologic expectations is a challenge for cognitive, affective and relational justice and demonstrates how this constrains possibilities for transformation.   While just talking without experimentation is not sufficient, there is a need for (educational) vocabulary to frame and implement post-critical approaches to north-south experiences. Vocabulary to support participants in facing the discomfort of being implicated in the issues they are confronting is clearly needed to allow participants to embrace uncertainty and complexity without reverting to epistemic certainty. A post-critical orientation does not dismiss  - 84 -  the importance of addressing immediate needs, but emphasizes the ability to address these needs differently and in a way that is characterized by integrity rather than feeling good, absolution, benevolence or superiority (conscious or otherwise). Rather than ignoring the complexities and uncertainties associated with realizations of complicity and interdependence in order to privilege fixing and solving, a post-critical approach emphasizes the need to engage with and hold these very complexities while encouraging a disposition of openness to self, others and knowledge. The lack of a vocabulary here is key in preventing different approaches to the same issues that we continue to attempt to solve through primarily band-aid style solutions. Beyond band-aiding would be beyond existence defined by single stories, social hierarchies and narrow conceptualizations of justice- we can only gesture towards this in the current systems and with the current vocabularies available. Jay’s interview demonstrates the patterns participants are educationally socialized into of being confronted with the complexities of the systems they engage with and maintain and wanting to focus on acting on the discomfort that accompanies it in tangible ways in order to get out of the space which produces the discomfort. His resistance to challenging the frames of knowledge within which he processed his experiences is not one of ignorance, but rather a continued investment in his own ontological and epistemic certainty. This reiterates the importance (for educators who are attempting to implement a post-critical approach to these types of experience) of offering pedagogy that does not appear as an immediate threat in a way that might make participants defensive. Rather, as discussed further in the discussion section, participants’ resistance to challenging their own investments in epistemic certainty and ontological security demonstrates the need for pedagogy that allows participants to engage with their privilege as loss and to cope with the learning of that loss. Ultimately, however, any post-critical approach which seeks to shift participants’ relation to self, others and knowledge and develop in participants a disposition of openness must remain ‘uncoercive’ in any attempt to identify, rearrange or reallocate cognitive, affective and relational investments. To do this requires offering pedagogical interventions without an attachment to how or when or if participants take them up, thereby, valuing and respecting the diversity of student perspectives.  While exploring my three core research questions, the findings gesture towards some challenges to a post-critical approach- those challenges are primarily challenges of articulation and of design. The summaries of the emerging themes from the individual interviews demonstrate some common themes but also hint at the extent to what emerges from a post- - 85 -  critical approach to educational north-south mobility experiences depends largely on the dispositions of the individual and their readiness/ability to engage with a post-critical orientation. The following section elaborates on this finding and on the specific challenges for educators in articulating and designing a truly post-critical approach to north-south mobility experiences.       - 86 -  Chapter Six: Discussion: The interviews conducted with the participants of the Social Innovation and Community Development program based out of Fortaleza, Brazil gesture towards the challenges of implementing an educational North to South mobility experience characterized by a post-critical approach: challenges of articulation, challenges of design, and the limitations of both articulation and design in generating a transformation. The findings demonstrated in the previous chapter illuminated the following themes that suggest some of the central challenges of articulation: conflicting identities and roles of the participants in engaging with the people they met through the program; and, how identity framed their experiences and understandings of transformation. As far as challenges of design, the interview responses, coupled with the observations, show challenges in designing for relating differently, for an unloading process, designing for discomfort and uncertainty, and working against the impulse to enact change through immediate action. In relation to the original research questions regarding whether participants identified as transformed, how their relationships to self, other and knowledge shifted or were reinforced and what was perceived as pedagogically effective or a limitation, the discussion below illustrates how the challenges facing a post-critical approach shaped student responses and the significance of this for future educators, practitioners and participants. These findings highlighted in the interview data are enhanced through the field notes I collected throughout participant observation and are integrated together to form the discussion section below.  Throughout the conceptual framework and interpretations of the interview transcript I have called upon the concept of ‘difficult knowledge, which is knowledge that potentially conflicts with one’s (conscious and unconscious) emotions, desires, understanding of self and of the world (Britzman and Pitt, 2003).  Britzman and Pitt elaborate that difficult knowledge demonstrates the “problem of learning from social breakdowns in ways that might open teachers and participants to their present ethical obligations” (Britzman & Pitt, 2003). In a critical approach, participants face difficult knowledge in ways that often suggest their mastery of their complicity and ability to be more virtuous than those who have yet to acknowledge their privilege. This is evident in the strong desire for action present in many of the participants’ narratives. When embraced by a post-critical approach, however, facing difficult knowledge has the potential to disrupt patterns of thinking, ways of knowing, and taken for granted norms of ways of being which are often structured by modern subjectivities’ attachments to teleologic and  - 87 -  evolutionary thinking. Zembylas (2015) states that “this conception of pedagogy requires the development of a new vocabulary by teachers and participants for describing the affective legacies of difficult knowledge (Simon, 2011a). It is through the exploration to develop this new vocabulary...that we might attain a deeper understanding of what is gained and what is lost in pedagogies addressing difficult knowledge” (p.395). Therefore, before moving to the challenges of design in practicing a post-critical approach, it is important to outline some of the challenges of articulation that emphasize this need to build a vocabulary that might open up possibilities for cognitive, affective and relational justice.  As the participant interviews illustrated, the participants’ expectations for the program and for the transformation they hoped or anticipated for was structured by ideas associated with the traditional (in the case of Maria, for example) or the critical (in the cases of Camila and James, for example) approaches. Part of the difficulty in asking participants whether they were transformed and what this transformation felt like or was facilitated by lies in the fact that the participants’ expectations and understandings of transformation are framed by the vocabulary that is available and familiar to them. This research was never meant to be generalizable about how to produce transformations through a post-critical approach to study abroad and/or service learning. However, the fact that only two out of the five self-identified as having undergone transformation through the program (and only one whose claims matched the type of transformation I had intended to explore) should be noted. Most of the participants who said that they did not feel that their experience was transformative cited their previous educational experiences and their pre-established worldview(s). Each of the participants came from very different backgrounds and it was clear that each of these personal histories was immensely influential in how the participants framed their experiences. Camila and James both had previous knowledge about systems of oppression, colonialism, and displacement and these factored very much into their identity both in how they framed what they learned and how they felt they were equipped coming into the program. Will, on the other hand, majored in Biology and he described his encounter with the types of themes this program was structured around (historical and ongoing manifestations of colonialism, systems of oppression, etc.) like it was learning a new language, and that because he had never talked about issues like this before, he felt some initial resistance to it;  - 88 -  “These were all words, this was all vocabulary, a system of knowledge, a system of education I had never- I’m in Biology and Spanish and Portuguese! I don’t know anything about this- like anthropology and autoethnography and learning about how you’re a part of these systems - I had never talked about that in my classes and so coming here with Bill and he was talking about this and I was like ‘hold up now, like slow down’ and so there was definitely resistance in the beginning, but as we kept going, as we started to visit these communities, as I started to get a concrete- as I started to become aware of what he was saying and how that was going to be acted out in the program, I kind of opened up.”  Educational identity and learner biography, therefore, played a role in how participants opened themselves to transformation within the educational experience. Camila and James, for instance, felt like they had a good grasp on global systems of oppression and thus said that there was less new content to be learned and thus they were less ready to identify with being transformed. Will, however, who had little relevant vocabulary in this area also felt an initial resistance to opening up to transformation because of this very nature of being met with so much of an unknown and yet eventually began to embrace the complexities and new approaches to thinking about the way global systems work. Beyond identity in terms of education, intersections of race, nationality and identity also played a role in framing the transformative nature of the program for the participants. While I have alluded to how race and identity invariably impacts the nature of transformation experienced by the diversity of participants, the purpose of this study was not to analyze how this was the case, but rather show that despite significantly different and diverse experiences of race, class, nationality, gender and many other orientations of identity, there are common attachments to and engagements with modern subjectivities which structure dominant ways of knowing and being in contemporary times.  How the participants understood and conceptualized transformation coloured what they were open to experiencing and what they articulated as relevant and related to this experience. As their expectations were framed in the traditional (which emphasizes personal development through intercultural exposure and the acquisition of new skills and awareness about the world by learning about a community different from their own) and critical (which emphasizes the development of individual qualities and mindsets to foster social change and avoid reproducing  - 89 -  unjust structures) orientations, those were the scripts against which they measured their experience.  Thus, articulating a post-critical transformation is not only a difficulty in this body of research but a difficulty facing educators and learners alike. The need to develop a vocabulary and language around the possibilities of a post-critical approach is not bound by theoretical or conceptual boundaries of literature but is found lacking in the very real ability of participants to be attuned to and then articulate any emergences of a post-critical approach. A step required in creating this much needed post-critical vocabulary is ensuring that a program oriented by a post-critical approach is explicit about its intentions, aims, motivations and goals prior to the experience itself and as it unfolds. An example from the program studied that demonstrates some of the confusion that participants felt over roles and expectations can be found in some of the educational encounters that took place during the week that the participants spent in the state of Rio de Janeiro. I observed and noted personal communications with the participants who voiced a confusion about their purpose at some of the visits we made, especially because we spent the first couple of days in the city of Rio de Janeiro in very much a touristic role. We visited some of the city’s iconic sites by bus and the following few days met with local grassroots organizations working towards (their conceptualization of) social change in the city. Between visits, however, some of the local contacts recommend that the participants spend a few hours in the Madureira market (which sold items and souvenirs, many of which were made in China). While much of this was due to this portion of the semester being a new addition to the educational experience, it had many participants notably confused about why they were in Rio and what their purpose was being there. The image of us leaving the indoor market to enter a favela reflects how the participants swung from tourist to student and seemed unsure as to which role was appropriate within the expectations of the program. This speaks to the importance for educational North to South mobility experiences to explicitly convey the intentions, motivations and expectations of a post-critical approach.  Part of the challenge of articulating a post-critical approach is determining if we, as educators and practitioners, are asking the right questions. For instance, after the week of visits in Rio de Janeiro, I used the tools we had discussed early in the semester to structure a reflective discussion and exercise for the participants following our visit to many local organizations,  - 90 -  including a visit to Morro Providencia, one of Rio’s largest and oldest favelas. Below is an excerpt from my observations that provides insight into this particular visit:  Cosme asked us, before we were very deep/high up into the favela, whether what we saw matched our expectations of what we21 thought a favela looked like. Most students said no, with a couple exceptions. We continued upwards until we came to a restaurant in the favela. Cosme asked the heavily armed men and women to make space for us, and they did. After lunch we continued upwards, the density increasing as we went upwards. We moved mostly in silence. At the top of the favela we stood on a wooden platform that gave a panoramic view of Rio stretching out as far as we could see. With the eyes of Morro Providencia residents peering down on us from higher dwellings or slivers of alleyway the students all brought out their cell phones to take group pictures and infinite selfies. Then, phones returned to pockets and purses, we descended back down the favela, avoiding, for the most part, eye contact with the elderly couples slowly climbing the stairs or the young boys playing futbol in corners of streets and most definitely with the young men and women who lined the direct route down, with one hand on a weapon and the other on a crackling walkie talkie. We exited the mouth of the favela and popped into an area where the buildings were covered in the murals installed in preparation for the World Cup two years prior.  This visit brought up tensions in the reflection around this question of whether one needs ‘to go to know’ and what happens as a result of ‘knowing’; what does knowing about more of these experiences that are previously unimaginable to participants mean? How is (potentially) more information about life in a favela acquired by the participants understood to be related to social change? What does ‘knowing about the other’ do and what is the point if it does not aim to change the situation? These questions are articulated from a critical approach; from a post-critical approach, the appropriate question to ask is: how does this knowing change your affective investments? Articulating this question in ways that are intelligible to participants is difficult and requires significant pedagogical work and support.  Another example that I will draw on to articulate the need for explicitly framing the intentions and expectations of a post-critical approach so that participants understand the                                                  21 The ‘we’ here is indicative of my immersion in the program as a participant and how I was read as such. interactions   - 91 -  motivations for meeting with various groups and what they are anticipating from the encounter is our taken from our time in Manaus.  We visited with a Tukano researcher at the federal university, and his students in their newly finished centre. The centre was funded in part by the relationship with SIT. The students were from various Indigenous communities and had all relocated to the urban centre of Manaus to pursue their academic studies. We opened up the discussion with one of the women asking: ‘what did you expect us to look like and be like?’ The opportunity to talk about these expectations, to confront them and to modify them is one of the strengths that these North-South mobility encounters offer as an educational space. The conversation quickly cut to the heart of things: capitalism as a core cause of the suffering felt by Amazonian communities and its relationship to the destruction of their lands and displacement of their peoples. There was resistance to what the participants felt was an ongoing critique of capitalism without a proposal of an alternative system: ‘what would be better than capitalism?’ ‘Me, from the US- we are surviving with capitalism’, ‘I like my life in California, and it is built on capitalism, but my family doesn’t benefit from capitalism’, ‘I’m just a Xicana out here trying to make it’. The frustration that had been emerging from participants’ personal communication with me about how they were being told about a lot of the problems facing the various communities they were meeting, but not being presented solutions resurfaced in this interaction that became quite heated. The participants wanted the young people they were meeting with here to tell them what the alternative to the system that was harming them was, they couldn’t imagine working towards a change that they could not guarantee. Part of the immense difficulty of articulating a post-critical approach to participants is asking them to hold the desire to propose an alternative to right the complex problems they encounter and their tendency to invoke epistemic certainty and privilege in formulating such a solution. In order to work towards a post-critical approach for North to South mobility experiences, it is essential that we face the challenge of articulation and work to better articulate what the program is aiming for and how it is different from traditional and/or critical approaches, emphasizing moving away from a relationship to knowledge that promotes description and (then) prescription and towards educating for an ability to identify and cope with the paradoxes, contradictions and complexity inherent in these engagements.   - 92 -  I have alluded to the fact that the research demonstrated two of the main types of challenges facing educators who wish to embrace a post-critical approach: challenges of articulation and of design. Although they are delineated for the purposes of analysis and discussion as separate challenges, they very much overlap. Due to the challenges of articulating a post-critical approach, the transformation that participants expected and were able to vocalize was constrained by the scripts of transformation available to them from traditional and critical orientations and thus their perspectives on what is required for a transformation in this educational space are limited. Despite this, their suggestions for future design warrant some attention.  The participants highlighted the importance of deep interpersonal relationships, the development of a new way of thinking about one’s self, and the importance of an unloading process as key factors of a program that might foster transformation. They also identified a frustration in the lack of concrete tools or options for action provided to them in light of confronting the systemic and complex nature of so many of the issues they encountered. These notions of what the participants saw as necessary for transformation (‘meaningful’ relationships, an unloading process, and discomfort) and what they saw as obstacles (a lack of tangible actions learned or provided) are worthy of discussion at face value but also within the understanding that the participants have been socialized in higher education settings (and settings outside of higher education) that value and reward traditional and critical approaches to north-south student engagements. As a result, they must be examined with caution as their descriptions and prescriptions tend to reinforce the expected transformations rather than expand the possibilities. After working to address the challenge of articulating a post-critical approach, therefore, it is these themes that emerge from the student narratives that must be initially considered in designing a post-critical approach to north-south mobility experiences. Each of the participants, in different ways, alluded to interpersonal relationships as the most important component of the program, but also, for some, it was an area that they felt was hindered by a variety of logistical constraints (time, language ability, cultural differences). Their interviews demonstrate a desire for meaningful relationships and a frustration in their inability to fully realize these in their interactions with people they met through the program. Despite this desire for ‘meaningful and authentic relationships’ (which is fraught with a tendency to instrumentalize the ‘Other’ for their own learning), almost all of the participants mentioned  - 93 -  fellow students or staff of the program as the people with whom they developed the most significant relationships during their time in Brazil. This highlights how if North-South mobility experiences are going to work towards new and different relationships between those from the North and South, the programs have to be restructured to allow for maximum contact between groups in a de-centred, horizontal manner. Wright (2015) highlights the Fair Trade Study Abroad model22 as an example for how this might be implemented and is something to consider in light of some of the barriers to relating to members of local communities and organizations that emerged through this research. Ultimately, the participants unanimously saw the value in developing meaningful relationships with those outside of their cohort and program, but all also acknowledge the logistical and cultural difficulties of actually relating across difference.  While the need for more reciprocal models stands, it is important to unpack this desire for meaningful relationships in the context of the educational approach. In fact, just as the participants’ expectations of self-growth/self-actualization and searches for appropriate action to change the world were evidently framed by traditional and critical approaches, their pursuit of ‘meaningful relationships’ also remained based on the same ontological parameters that characterize traditional and critical approaches. The instrumentalization of others to meet self-actualization places participants in a position of entitlement in relation to others. This can be seen in the discussion that took place in Manaus between the participants and a group of Indigenous university students. After the discussion, Camila relayed her frustration at not hearing concrete, proposed solutions from the Indigenous students which demonstrates a tendency to rely on ‘Others’ as a source of knowledge (as well as a persistent desire for fixed and concrete actions).  This finding came through the interviews clearly as participants emphasized the high value they placed on the experiential nature of the program and how this deepened their learning.  Many of the participants had realizations of similarity across difference. For example, Camila conveyed that  “hearing from their own mouths that this is what I’m fighting for, this is what I want, just a reminder that we’re all looking for a lot of the same things at the end of the day”. However, this idea that ‘hearing from their own mouths’ that Camila emphasizes is key in her realization of similarity (and potentially solidarity?) reaffirms that the participants’ presence is                                                  22 See http://globalsl.org/fair-trade-learning/  - 94 -  necessary and that their reactions might not have been as impactful had they not been able to directly encounter someone’s lived experience of the issue they were studying. Will also stated that: “Going out into the community, going and meeting people who make up these organizations, who run it, who are behind these ideas, who implement these ideas in the community, really, really helps me shift my way of thinking, really helps transform my way of thinking…”.  He demonstrates how essential he views the experiential component of this type of learning and continues to say, “Coming face to face with these realities [like the material poverty of Indigenous communities but the richness of their community] definitely is a way that the program challenges each of us to think about or own wealth, other people’s wealth, and for me, how my wealth is keeping other people in poverty”. His reiterations of the usefulness of being there in person and accessing people and places that encouraged him to think differently reflect the idea, common amongst the participants, that it was important for them to go there to learn about the realities experienced in Brazil. James added insight into how the fact of being there changed the scale and impact of what he learned and how it (literally) brought him closer to the issue: “I feel like the times when I was most closed to what was being presented to me was the times that most resembled traditional lecture, you know the times when people are sitting giving us a powerpoint, talking to us, in Rio de Janeiro at the Instituto dos pretos Novos, for examples, the opening part of that experience involved a lecture which was interesting, which had translation, which as a class was good but what was far more meaningful was seeing, you know, 30 feet away the dig site where bones that are not more than 200 years old were being dug four feet out of the ground under the street and building and so that was what really cemented and impacted me in that experience far more than a lecture did.” Maria echoed some of the same sentiments and said that,  “I think it’s the actual doing, the act of actually engaging is what’s going to help. I don’t think that just be reading about it and learning about it you’re going to actually  - 95 -  understand or connect, you can’t make connections with people without actually knowing them”.  The above quotations demonstrate how adamant the participants were that by being there in person, able to meet and talk to the people facing the issues they were presented with, they were able to gain a more in depth understanding of the problem. For educators of a post-critical approach, therefore, it is essential to consider how the experiential component of North-South mobility encounters has a generative potential in ‘making real’ the realities that I think participants are already aware of (even if they cannot admit it) must be cautious of instrumentalizing other bodies for the purpose of learning- a critique that is loud and clear and justified and fair in the literature. The participants’ desire for relationality is important and can be problematic or generative depending on the intentions and frames of reference that inform this desire. While the development of relationships both informs and emerges from north-south experiences, significant attention to the ethics of relations must be considered and explicitly incorporated into such programs, however, the types of relations that participants desire must be pedagogically addressed. Therefore, while the participants articulate this desire for meaningful relationships or relationships structured outside of the confines of academic learning, their desires are less different from those associated with a traditional or critical approach than they may appear. The participants’ desire to learn about people first hand demonstrates a return to the search for the same affective and intellectual economies that structure the traditional and critical approaches, rather than a post-critical. When asked if she thought a program that explicitly aimed to instill reciprocal relationships was feasible, Camila stated:  “Like I said, that’s initially what I was looking for. And I have friends who are like studying abroad for the sake of saying I want to travel... But I also know a ton of students who are aware of their positionality and also who are looking for more than just ‘oh I want to travel and do touristy things’...there is definitely a demand for programs that are more like this, more immersive...I think talking about an ‘ethical exchange’ is going to be pretty interesting because people are going to be like, ‘wait, what does that mean, what do you mean, does this mean there are non-ethical exchanges?’ And I think that can be really intriguing.” While it is important to note the desire emerging from participants for North-South experiences that are structured differently, their notion of ‘different’ falls within the realm of traditional and critical (partly, I argue because of the lack of vocabulary to articulate what it  - 96 -  would look/be like otherwise). Camila’s statement that she was initially looking for reciprocal relationships and a program that facilitated them is important and indicates a demand for a study abroad that seeks to establish new and different ideas of relating beyond the dominant narratives of superiority and inferiority, but should also be examined in light of her earlier statement that she was there because she wanted to feel a certain way- the way in which relationship building is emphasized as a move towards reciprocity/ethical engagement has the potential for participants to instrumentalize these very relationships for self-actualization- for making them feel a certain way. What they see as an alternative or different future model seems to be more of the same, and so a big part of the challenge facing a post-critical approach is designing a program that attempts to hold participants from short circuiting back into the same desires and investments.   By examining the participants’ suggestions for future models of North to South mobility experiences, I trace this continuing investment in their familiar affective and intellectual economies by highlighting how even though they are saying that they want something different, what they are articulating is very much the same. This reaffirms the immense challenge of articulating that post-critical educators face so that participants’ experiences are not framed by the vocabulary and economies they are most familiar with. As far as future models, Camila discusses the possibility of a study abroad program being ethical and what would be required for that to happen, after a long pause she argues that:  “it depends on the people like the individual which is sort of where that limitation is because I think you can set it all up one way, you can make it so that ‘alright we have all these questions, we have these discussions, they’re going to give back’...like you can do all of that but if I’m still going in and thinking ‘oh look at these cute, little brown kids, let me pinch their cheeks or let me save them’, you know? In that way, it is a little bit unethical. If at the end of the day, the individual still thinks ‘I’m coming in and doing some huge service to this community, like changing lives’ like that’s still to me unethical in that you’re exploiting this, you’re making it for your own personal gain... I think at the end of the day a lot of this is more for us than it is for any of them. I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t want to feel a certain way. So I think that you can set up all of the right conditions and have it be as ethical as possible- I think you can make it ten times more ethical than what this has been,  but I think your problem is just always going to be...it’s going to be the individual and to some degree you can’t control that….I think the barrier is always  - 97 -  going to be the individual, their mindset, their background, what do they know about an ethical exchange, what do they think of as being ethical, do they see their behaviour as problematic?” In this quote she touches on two key ideas; firstly: the extent to which the program is ethical and able to foster transformation as I have described is ultimately up to the individual, their disposition of engagement and their openness/vulnerability to the encounter; and, secondly: she notes that ‘I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t want to feel a certain way’, the motivation to engage in North-South mobility experiences is wrapped up in an affective desire for goodness that needs to be taken into account, disrupted (but not only disrupted) and transformed (this is the key). The first premise, that the extent of the transformation (no matter how the program is structured) is dependent on the dispositions and readiness of the student is a good point which is most markedly a fundamental challenge of designing a post-critical approach. Each participant has a history that they bring with them to the educational experience- the design has to allow for different degrees of readiness- again this can be enhanced through addressing the explicit articulation of a post-critical approach so that even if the individual’s goals vary, they are clear about the program’s.  The second idea of importance nestled in Camila’s quote is her statement that ‘I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t want to feel a certain way’. This is as close to an acknowledgement of the structures of feeling that are offered to students as scripts for their experience in north-south mobility experiences, and it is wrapped up therefore in a very specific relationship to self, others and knowledge. As Gaztambide-Fernandez and Howard (2013) demonstrates, “part of what motivates privileged adolescents to engage in benevolent acts, especially community service activities, is the ability to present themselves to others as caring, engaged, and generous” (p.2). Therefore, Camila’s assertion that no matter how ethically the program is constructed, the extent to which it will foster a post-critical transformation depends a lot on the dispositions of the individual and how ready and able they are to engage with the difficult work of examining what desires and investments structure their expectations, motivations and experiences of a north-south encounter in order to possibly reorient those desires and expectations toward something else.  Beyond the desire for ‘more meaningful’ relationships, the research demonstrated a need for the development of a pedagogical ‘unloading process’ for participants to begin to engage  - 98 -  differently. The suggestion of a development of an unloading process by one of the participants is an interesting request and there were several moments where I observed that this would have been useful. One example is from the intercultural youth gathering that took place early on in the program. The weekend retreat at the Nazare Flor school organized by residents of the MST 23settlement in Itapipoca, Ceara was the first of its kind in the history of the Social Innovation and Community Development program. It brought together youth from the Itapipoca MST settlement, youth from a nearby Quilombo24, a group of geography students from Universidade Federal do Ceara, a group of students from various African countries that had been colonized by the Portuguese (such as Cape Verde, Angola, Mozambique, Guinea Bissau, St Thomas and Principe), youth from the Maceio settlement where we were gathered, a group of students from living and working in a favela community in Fortaleza called Bom Jardim, Indigenous Tremembe youth from the Buriti community, and us visitors from the SIT students, including the five American students, Bill Calhoun, Oelito Brandao, Dr. Vanessa Andreotti and myself.  During the gathering, there were three featured ‘keynote25’ speakers: Dr. Andreotti; Renato Roseno de Oliveira, a State Representative and lawyer, who spoke about the problems contributing to violence amongst youth in Ceara, and a woman who spoke about gendered violence. Dr. Andreotti’s talk began with the question of how many people think quality of life in Canada is better than in Brazil. As hands shot up around the semi-circled audience, I took note of who agreed that quality of life was better in Canada; four out of five of the American students raised their hands, as did the majority of the students from the various African countries, as well as a few (but not majority) of the geography students and youth from Bom Jardim. The hands waving in the hot air were an indication of a very real manifestation of narratives of superiority26                                                  23  MST is the Movimento dos Trabalhadores Sem Terra; in English: the Landless Workers Movement.  24 A quilombola is an afro-descendant community that has collective land rights as granted by the Brazilian constitution. Historically, quilombos were the “territorial settlements of run-away enslaved Africans and their descendants, while the term ‘quilombola’ refers to the communities themselves” (Reist, 2016). 25  Each of these talks occurred in Portuguese, and so my observations are focused on particular statements and reactions to them, rather than the overall content or specifics of the speeches.  26 This theme of superiority and inferiority and how it produces very concrete opinions and views on progress and development was echoed in the later talks. The man speaking about youth violence likened the communities of Conjunto Palmeiras (one of the largest favelas in Fortaleza) to Namibia and Mereiles (the wealthiest- and most gentrified- neighborhood in Fortaleza) to Europe; explicitly calling upon a worldview that is premised on the distinction between underdeveloped/third world/developing and developed/third world/modern countries- essentially implementing a time based theory of progress that put neighborhoods like Conjunto Palmeiras into the past and suggests that they simply need to catch up to others.  - 99 -  and inferiority that are the foundation for ideas and commitments to ‘development in the name of progress’ in people from various background. There is an urgent need for activities that allow people to engage with superiority, inferiority, development and progress- all narratives that persisted strongly amongst the various groups present and that have been well documented in (global citizenship) education literature (See Andreotti 2015; Willinsky 1998; Heron 2007; Bryan, 2008; Shultz 2007 as examples). The notion of a single story (Adichie, 2009) of progress and development that has divided humanity “between those who are perceived to be leading progress, development and human evolution; and those who are perceived to be lagging behind” is best traced to a “dominant modern/colonial global imaginary...that ascribes differentiated value to cultures/countries that are perceived to be ‘behind’ in history and time and cultures/countries perceived to be ‘ahead’” (Alaasutari & Andreotti, 2015, p.64). This imaginary, Andreotti elaborates, has the power to capture and frame “our collective imagination” and desires in ways that are so normalized and invisibilized that they are hard to point out or challenge (Alaasutari & Andreotti, 2015, p.71). The hands raised by both Americans and Brazilians of various backgrounds to indicate that the majority of attendees of the MST gathering believed that quality of life was better in Canada than in Brazil demonstrates the normalization of this single story which evidently challenges practices seeking to engender cognitive, affective and relational justice. There is a need for activities in these educational settings that go beyond the sharing of peoples’ personal experiences and relations to manifestations of violence that could connect these ‘separate’ experiences to the larger narratives that we buy into on a daily basis and that shape our interactions and realities. I draw on the example of this intercultural youth gathering to show that while it is important and impactful to bring together diverse groups of people and to de-center any one group’s experience, the challenge facing educators is to avoid merely inviting various group members to articulate their separate experience of an issue (ie. gendered or crime related violence) but instead to begin to understand how these experiences, different though they may be, are products of the same stories or grand narratives; which themselves point to affective investments in modern subjectivities. This work of allowing people to feel that they are connected to the same stories and desires requires an unloading process that encourages participants to identify their desires and to examine how they shape their relationships to themselves, others and knowledge.   - 100 -  Another example that demonstrates the need for a post-critical approach to work an ‘unloading process’ into its design emerges from our visits with various Indigenous communities in Manaus, Amazonas:  We visited the Satere aldeia which is a centre for Indigenous medicine. We walked by the tables of necklaces and bracelets laid by the entry for our purchase to go and meet the community leaders. We were given a meal, which we ate- only the visitors, not the community- with our fingers; it was crocodile, fish and tapioca. While we ate the participants talked amongst themselves in English, despite their advanced Portuguese skills at this point in the program. They focused on the monkey that was tied up in a cage. All the buildings were variations of clay and water with thatched roofs, there was one bathroom. We were welcomed by a dance by a group of young girls and then listened to Sahu introduce some of the youth in the aldeia; many of the mothers were 13-14, the facial expressions of the participants wore their shock at hearing this.  The participants’ outright shock (and preoccupation) with the young parents in the community, the children who did not attend school, the lack of running water in the toilet and the noisy monkey in the cage made me seriously question whether it is possible to bring people to these places and not read ‘poverty’? The questions of ‘how are we reading?’ and ‘how are we being read?’ were worthy of consideration here. The participants were clearly being read as tourists; their visit did involve a financial contribution and covered the cost of the meal. It also explained the jewelry and medicines they/we were encouraged to buy. On the flip side, the community was being read as poor, lacking and in need. How could these initial readings be disrupted? What would be required to disrupt the narratives that have created this static response? How do these readings continue to obstruct the potential for North-South mobility experiences to strive for cognitive, relational and affective justice? How do we design a pedagogical approach that encourages an unloading process wherein understandings of wealth, poverty, development, education and success are questioned, complicated, and held in front of us?  Another fundamental element of a post-critical approach that was evident in the student interviews is the role that discomfort plays in education. I have chosen to discuss discomfort in the context of challenges of design facing educators who wish to implement a post-critical approach because designing a program that embraces discomfort as a source of learning that is disruptive but generative requires significant educational and pedagogical work on the behalf of  - 101 -  the educator. It is difficult to create curriculum and pedagogy that provokes discomfort in ways that do not produce inertia or paralysis, and at the same time do not push learners to re-invest in the desire for immediate action required to re-establish the means for ‘feeling good’. In many of the student narratives, they were able to speak to the value of being uncomfortable and how this had been a generative part of their learning process. However, as Andreotti (2016d) writes, “we may even say we want to learn from discomfort, but when it actually happens, when we lose epistemic privilege, we feel wronged and fight to re-gain that privilege again”. This process of reasserting epistemic privilege was evident in the student interviews and therefore, one of the key challenges of designing a post-critical approach, therefore, is considering the practical question of how the pedagogy and curriculum can be organized and implemented in a way that does not shortcut the possibilities for different relationships to self, others and knowledge in the name of coping with discomfort. According to Zembylas (2015) “difficult knowledge inevitably creates this ambivalence between hope and despair and thus curriculum and pedagogy should be able to accommodate ambivalent feelings” (p.394). This ability to not only accommodate but design for ambivalence is a challenge for educators embracing a post-critical approach.  As I mentioned in the methodology chapter, the participants were presented with a series of tools to give them a set of vocabulary that might help them process or frame their experiences when it came time for reflection (see Appendix C). The level to which participants engaged with the tools after they were initially presented to them varied, although generally their interviews led me to believe that they were minimal. Camila found that the tools were too academic and thus inaccessible, although she admitted that the vocabulary and concepts of material and existential wealth and poverty were useful as was the idea that organizations could be working on alleviating or transforming the causes or effects of poverty and she expressed a desire for more examples rather than more terms. James, however, found the tools very useful and stated that, “I found [them] to be absolutely invaluable in giving me terminology to explain some sort of lived experience that I’ve already had...It made it easier to write about my experiences and to some extent to speak about them”. Maria admitted that she never looked at them once, and Will mentioned in his interview that after talking through them again in the interview itself, he wished he had gone back to them during his community development project and time in the Satere community because they would have been very useful for the unloading process that he outlined as necessary for engaging with different systems of thinking. He elaborated on the tools that:  - 102 -  “They’re very useful in providing the questions and methods of thinking to critically analyse yourself and the organization you’re visiting...I don’t know if there’s anything concrete that I take from these that is going to change how I live my life...it’s just very...I don’t know...I feel like it’s very personal and it’s very easy to understand; not easy to answer sometimes, but they’re very personal questions, if they’re not the questions relating back to the organization, so it’s self-reflective, ‘I’m going to examine myself in this moment’ Ali: Right, maybe it takes a level of vulnerability also to share the answers to some of them? It does, You might not want to answer some of these questions about yourself. Ali: Because you don’t want the answers? Yeah.” Will alludes here to the discomfort that is often produced in the learning environment that a North-South mobility experience can produce and that there is a tendency to turn away from this discomfort because the level of vulnerability required to face it is high and disruptive towards one’s self-image. Practitioners in this field must choose their pedagogical tools wisely and intentionally. It is clear that the ones we introduced as part of the methodology of this research do not fill the gap but they also point to some areas where they were useful and what is still needed in this field. Primarily, as Will notes above, the tools used in these educational spaces need to invite participants into self-reflexivity and therefore must encourage (and reward?) vulnerability. Additionally, they are useful in providing a vocabulary for participants to frame their experiences, however, even further translation of these terms outside of academic contexts with the inclusion of practical examples would be useful. The tools can also be reframed so as to help participants move out of the paralysis that they feel in being presented with a series of problems and seemingly no solutions. Beyond self-reflexivity, there needs to be tools for participants to draw on to come out of their world being shattered and towards a viewpoint that allows them to see this as useful in imagining and experimenting with other ways of knowing, relating and existing in ways that embrace uncertainty. This is a question that any post-critical approach must consider: what pedagogical framework will assist in transforming learners from knowing about problems, to feeling implicated, connected and able to cope?   - 103 -  The challenges of articulating what a post-critical approach might lead to have been made clear above and have been present in the immense frustration that participants felt with being presented with what they saw as only problems and no solutions. While this is a challenge for articulating, in that educators must grapple with how best to explain the what and the why of a post-critical approach that does not aim for direct action, it is also a challenge of design because “when education is centred around problems that require solving, it is natural for learners to want to take action” (Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich, 2015, p. 68). Educators must work to present the context within which they bring students not as problems to be solved or else this is how students will react to them and thus feel frustrated when there is no tool book for action or no list of steps to take to fix the problems that they see concretely. As Andreotti (2015) articulates,  “our analyses of problems are already subordinated to our hopes for solutions, our desires for betterment, progress, knowledge, innocence, entitlement and futurity. People want to see themselves in a positive light in the mirror and this quest for satisfaction severely restricts their perception and what is possible to happen….it is precisely by confronting the impossibility of our desire for changing the world without changing ourselves (by interrupting our satisfaction with pleasurable desires), that lies a possibility for change that can challenge the modern/colonial imaginary.” (2015, p.226) The challenge in designing a post-critical approach is creating something that doesn’t leave learners in a state of existential crisis, as I have outlined above with regard to the importance of delicately using discomfort, but rather supports learners in the move from describing and then prescribing (ie. becoming aware of problems and then seeking out appropriate actions to solve it) and towards holding the complexity and uncertainty that they encounter in this learning experience, resisting the temptation to ‘fix’. This is a complicated endeavor as taking a post-critical approach means balancing the need for certainty of knowing past and present global inequities with a sense of accountability and responsibility, with the need for uncertainty in terms of what ways of knowing and being might generate new possibilities for the systems we currently have. Part of holding the tensions and complexities that the learners encounter is important not only to design against the impulse that often characterizes how they position themselves in relation to these uncertainties (and leads to a reification of those in the global North as unquestioned change makers), but is also an important demonstration of listening to the partners with whom the program liaises and works with.   - 104 -  As much as this has been an exploration into the possibilities of a post-critical approach through the student experience (a perspective that has been privileged in the service learning and study abroad literature) and not an investigation into the perspectives of the local organizations which host the participants and are essential in their learning process, this research is still able to gesture towards how this relationship can further enhance learners’ abilities to hold their uncertainties and discomfort in tension without turning to direct action that promotes reinvestment in their ontological and epistemic certainty. It is important to consider that while participants feel this impulse to ‘do something’ in light of what they learn through their interactions with various community organizations, the community partners do not necessarily expect a direct action of reciprocity in this context, they might instead expect that the stories learned be carried back to the participants’ home circles, or the generation of future relationships of collaboration. For example rather than demand a specific commitment or sacrifice on the part of the student, some of the community partners wanted a display of deeper humility, vulnerability and engagement in their interactions with the participants. This was evident in our time in Manaus, as one of our contacts there highlighted. He outlined his disappointment at how the participants would introduce themselves to each community they entered. They often followed this format: ‘Hi, my name is X, I am Y years old, I am from Z in the US and I study A’. He was disappointed because he felt that this did not convey who they were or why they were there and so how then could they expect to be seen as anything other than a tourist? He said that the participants needed to swallow their discomfort and open themselves in a way that was truly vulnerable for them to be able to create any meaningful type of interaction. He also commented that in the visit to the aldeia, the participants did not seem to engage with the residents and instead they were closed off and quiet- observations I had taken note of during our time there too. He interpreted their silence as them being unsure of how to conduct themselves in an environment that was so foreign to them. I agree with this interpretation and in the absence of a familiar way of conducting themselves, the participants were ready to accept narratives of poverty that they had previously been told. He noted that they seemed not to consider the difference between observation and implication, that they had come to hear the stories of others but could not see themselves within those stories. Therefore, rather than have participants feel compelled to demonstrate that they are dissatisfied with their complicity in systems of harm in the form of a boycott or petition, for example, some partners have different expectations and  - 105 -  desires for the participants’ learning and it is paramount that the design of any post-critical approach take this into account.  This need to listen to community partners is an obvious one but one that I write explicitly here because (as evident even in the focus of this research) the perspectives of the community organizations are often assumed or spoken for. In much of the literature there are calls for further engagement with host communities but what is often assumed is that these organizations have an education facing or learner centred mandate that they are ready to articulate clearly to participants and program facilitators alike. In designing a post-critical model, therefore, it is key that participants are engaging with local organizations and movements that are interested in promoting similar dispositions to those that a post-critical approach works to engender. In that sense, educators are tasked with communicating and working with organizations before the program takes place to decide how they are each/both/together going to model the paradoxes and complexities that are inherent in their work and the engagement of learners from the global north. One example of this kind of modelling that I am alluding to can be seen in the partnership with Central Unica das Favelas (CUFA) in Rio de Janeiro. In the visit, the participants noticed the presence of corporate logos such as Nike and Facebook in the community spaces providing educational and capacity building opportunities for youth living in favelas. The work that they do is innovative, radical and so important in connecting people within favelas. Their funding relies heavily on corporate sponsorship and thus to talk about capitalism and racism explicitly jeopardizes their funding. The work that they do relies on a tacit agreement to only address symptoms of the complex issues that face people in favelas, not the causes. The ability to discuss this tacit agreement models for the participants the complex and paradoxical nature of engaging with the systems of harm that they encounter in their learning experience and it is important that community partners are able to articulate these contradictions. In designing a post-critical approach to north-south mobility experiences, therefore, it is crucial that educators identify organizations that match this approach and that are gesturing towards decolonial futures and other possibilities of existence. These organizations are not meant to be examples of the solution (which must be articulated to the participants), but rather are models of how different communities are working together to face the uncertainty and contradictions they encounter in turning towards the systems they perpetuate. As much as the challenge of articulation has been foregrounded as a central finding of this research, the work to begin to articulate a post-critical  - 106 -  approach must involve working with communities whose goals align to develop the vocabulary that can be used in the educational context. Returning to the original research questions which structured this exploration of the possibilities of a post-critical approach to north-south mobility experiences, this research has shed light on the significant challenges facing those who wish to experiment with such an approach and on the specifics of transformation, shifting relationships and investigation into what is pedagogically effective in facilitating this. The participants in the Social Innovation and Community Development program in Fortaleza, Brazil articulate their experiences of transformation within the frames and grammar of traditional and critical approaches to this type of education. This does not mean that the moves towards cognitive, relational and affective justice that were present in the program were ineffective in challenging the participants epistemological and ontological certainty, but rather that it is not possible to ascertain (at this point) what the exact nature of the impact of the program was on participants; this cannot be assessed until the participants return home and begin to (re)engage with their contexts- perhaps in a new way, perhaps the same as before. The research questions did not aim to uncover whether or not the participants were transformed, but rather how they articulated potential experiences of transformation, and in this sense, the findings are significant in pointing towards the need for explicit and consistent articulation of a post-critical approach and the type of shifts and transformation it would seek to encourage.  As far as how participants’ relationships to themselves, to others, and to knowledge were shifted, challenged, and/or reinforced through participation in the program, the interviews demonstrated the range of experiences each individual underwent throughout the program. Some gained insight into the connections between struggles that previously seemed separated and a self-awareness (in some cases) of the way in which the pursuit of their desires and lifestyles were predicated on the persistence of harmful systems. While some participants showed very little interest in discussing or contemplating their complicity or relation to narratives of progress and development, some participants reflected on disruptions in their modes of thinking. The variety of experiences that showed how participants’ epistemologies and ontologies were challenged and reinforced points, again, to the way in which individual identity, learner biography and dispositions of engagement shape what kind of transformation is possible. Although the transformative potential of a post-critical approach is highly dependent on the willingness of the  - 107 -  individual to engage, it is important to offer pedagogical tools for learners to begin to experience, trace, and encourage the shift in sensibilities that this transformation might allow for without an attachment to whether or not they take them up.  In light of the challenges of articulation and design outlined above, this research points to several recommendations to begin to work towards a post-critical approach to north-south mobility experiences in higher education. The student interview responses demonstrated the difficulties of an articulation of the post-critical in face of the already established expectations that were constructed by the traditional and critical approaches to north-south mobility experiences. This research emerges in response to the growing presence of service learning and study abroad programs in higher education that bring learners from the global north to the global south. However, given this rising trend in these types of experiential programs, it is crucial that a post-critical approach articulate how it is different from what mainstream approaches tend to be characterized by and to signal to participants that what they have been socialized to expect from these encounters is not what a post-critical program offers or invites. The success of a post-critical approach depends on a consistent articulation of its goals, aims and possible emergences throughout the beginning (marketing and recruitment), duration and debrief stages.  The need for clearly articulating a post-critical approach may, at first, seem to be undermined because it inherently involves uncertainty (both as a potential emergence and a characteristic of the process), however, dealing with uncertainty is precisely the challenge (of articulation and) of a post-critical approach. A post-critical approach seeks to encourage and equip learners to encounter, identify and cope with paradoxes and contradictions, complexities and uncertainties, and the discomfort that ensues. In doing so, and provoking new dispositions and relationships to knowledge that move away from ontologies grounded in epistemological certainty and towards new possibilities in the pedagogical process, a post-critical approach moves to implement a global justice literacy framework grounded in cognitive, affective and relational justice. Tools that interrupt the narratives that participants bring with them are therefore paramount to the possibility and success of a post-critical approach. In discussing how some of the participants recognized the need for pedagogical tools to interrupt their tendency to reassert their affective stability with concepts of progress and certainty that ground their epistemologies, it is clear that much work needs to be done to disrupt the narratives that learners from the global north (and south) bring to the educational encounter as well in ways that  - 108 -  encourage holding the uncertainty and discomfort of disruption. The questions that need to be addressed and researched in light of this are: When and how do we introduce tools that support people in doing this? How do we design an educational process that works to (uncoercively) move learners away from control and certainty? Finally, a post-critical approach to an educational north-south mobility program cannot be considered in separation from working together more closely with the communities that the program enables participants to come into contact with, learn from, and grow with. The curation of organizations and communities that partner with such a program must align on their intentions for the encounter. This research showed that there is a lack of vocabulary for participants (and practitioners) to be familiar with to articulate experiences and relationships (to self, other and knowledge) that rely on epistemologies and ontologies outside of dominant scripts. This lack of vocabulary in articulating paradoxes, complexities and uncertainties is not unique to the experience of the participants but is lacking for all those who would like to pursue and experiment with this type of education. The building of this vocabulary, to articulate the aims and motivations, must be developed through the engagement with communities who are already ‘doing’, already relating differently. As the student interview data showed, the participants bring their expectations for an education that fosters and rewards description and prescription (seeing a problem, identifying it, identifying one’s role in it, and working to fix it). This is characteristic of both the traditional and critical approaches, and more broadly the type of education that learners have been socialized into. In working differently with communities who are open to a post-critical approach, however, there is the possibility of reorienting learners’ impulse to instigate direct action (in reciprocity or for other reasons) that absolve them of their complicity. The participants overwhelmingly articulated a desire for action, solutions and ways forward, and while a post-critical approach cannot offer them the tools and answers they are necessarily looking for, it might allow communities that the participants engage with to invite them to enact different and specific responses. Given that participants will inevitably ask “what do you want me to do?”, as evident in the narratives running through the interviews, communities should be given the opportunity to invite them to respond27 in the ways they see appropriate.                                                  27 Examples of what this could look like: inviting participants to tell the stories they hear and carry back home, boycott certain products, talk to other communities going through the same thing, invite them to consider what is happening in their local context in relation to this issue, reflect on their learning and keep open the possibility for further relationships and collaborative work in the future, begin to educate others, etc.   - 109 -  A post-critical approach to North to South mobility experiences in higher education must address the gap between what is perceived as possible and what is possible (Stein, 2017). In discussing what future decolonial models of these educational experiences might look like with the participants, they highlighted a perception that higher education institutions would never support (what they understood to be) a post-critical approach to service learning and/or study abroad. James, for instance, stated:  “I don’t know if it’s possible to operate some sort of study abroad program that’s going to be accepted...by the academic structure in the United States and Canada. I don’t think it’s possible to run a study abroad program that’s sufficiently decolonial and still be accepted...I feel like at this point there’s definitely not a critical mass of [institutions of higher education] that would accept a decolonial education- not decolonial education- I don’t think these institutions of higher learning are going to accept and credit the kinds of education that could be considered decolonial.” This hesitation and distrust in the institutional support for an education that gestures towards decolonial futures suggests that the one of the barriers to implementing a post-critical approach is not that it is not necessary, beneficial or useful, but rather that it is unintelligible to the higher education institutions that have the potential to accredit it. Wright (2013) states that “the formal education system represents one of the key institutions involved in the propagation of global coloniality, and as such it should be no surprise that it is difficult to redirect Study Abroad for alternative purposes” (p.86). While this exploratory case study clearly focused on generating a snapshot of a program that was attempting to do something different in the field of north-south mobility experiences and not generate claims based on generalizability, to truly understand the significance of the findings of this research, it is necessary to consider the higher educational landscape in which it functions. According to Yin (2013), “to arrive at a sound understanding of the case, a case study should not be limited to the case in isolation but should examine the likely interaction between the case and its context”. In order to fully locate the findings illustrated through the exploration of this selected case in the wider conversations within universities, it is important to recognize the ways in which they too are shaped and constructed by (and shaping and constructing) the global imaginary. McMillan and Stanton (2014) write; Central to ethical and sustainable community engagement is building relationships, often  - 110 -  across complex boundaries. This is not an easy or uncomplicated issue (Anzuldua, 1987; Giroux 1992; Hayes & Cuban, 1997; McMillan, 2009, 2011; Simonelli et al., 2004; Skilton-Sylvester & Erwin, 2000), as crossing boundaries is about negotiating complex power relations. Doing it with integrity and authenticity entails an engagement first and foremost with the self. Learning in complex unfamiliar contexts therefore is not just about knowledge and action – or knowing and doing. It is crucially about being as well (Barnett, 2004, 2009; Barnett & Coate, 2005), i.e., about the essential nature of the student, visible and present in the learning process. The potential for a post-critical approach in truly engaging with something different in North to South mobility experiences in higher education relies on its commitment not to ‘fixing’ but to unraveling what structures our ‘being’ and what possibilities lie beyond what we can know.     - 111 -  Conclusions This thesis has been an exploration of the possibilities of a post-critical approach to North to South mobility experiences through the examination of transformation experienced by participants of the Social Innovation and Community Development program in Brazil. The literature review framing this research demonstrated the predominance of traditional and critical models of service learning and study abroad and the growing literature indicating a shift or turn that suggests the possibility for creating pedagogy and curricula to facilitate a learning encounter that deals with the historical inequities embedded in these learning environments in different ways. I built on Bruce’s (2013) theorizing on a post-critical approach by integrating and expanding on Sousa Santos’ (2007) call for global cognitive justice and drew on the EarthCARE framework (Andreotti, in press) by attending to cognitive, affective, and relational justice. This qualitative case study provides insight into the potential and the challenges of implementing a post-critical approach. Through observation and interviews with the participants of the program, I examined how the participants articulated ‘transformation’, if they experienced it in the program and what they thought might provoke it. I also attended to shifts in participants’ relationships to themselves, to others, and to knowledge throughout the program, as well as examining what were perceived as effective and limiting pedagogical efforts to foster global justice. The analysis showed that participants’ experiences of transformation were very much framed within the scripts of north-south mobility experience that are most dominant and available to them. The case study was useful in highlighting challenges of articulation and design of a post-critical approach, but also in demonstrating (in the narratives of some participants) how there continues to be pedagogical potential in these types of spaces/encounters to engage with an education that disrupts the persistent narratives and desires that constrain our relationships (with self, others and knowledge) in ways that are epistemologically and ontologically limiting. The shifts, and in some cases lack of a shift, in these different relationships highlights dimensions of north-south mobility experiences that aim to generate transformation outside of the bounds of the traditional and critical approaches which emphasize personal and professional development, and agency in social change, respectively.  Drawing on three propositions for education identified by Spivak, and translated by Andreotti, I aim to demonstrate the implications of the findings discussed in the earlier chapter. The three propositions are: learning one’s privilege as one’s loss, education as an uncoercive rearrangement of desires, and learning (to play) the double bind  - 112 -  (rather than to solve it). To conclude this text, I also indicate how this case draws attention to the extent to which post-critical approaches are not only appropriate and applicable to north-south mobility experiences, but are relevant in considering the context of higher education and assumptions about the role of higher education and future social change.  According to Andreotti (2014b), ‘learning one’s privilege as one’s loss’ involves a realization that the privileges we have inherited have also “restricted our imagination and possibilities of existence and have prevented us from having access to other ways of knowing and being” (p.104). ‘Privileges’ here often refers to, for example, class mobility, social and cultural capital, whiteness, education, among other identity categories. While these have real and important impacts on how participants process, understand and react to their experiences, it is the privileges enacted by modern subjectivities and the privilege (or loss) of epistemic certainty that this text has been preoccupied with. Therefore, while some of the participants belong to underrepresented groups in university and wider society and thus might be seen as having struggled for their privilege rather than inheriting it, the inherited privilege I am discussing is the privilege of the ways of knowing and being that are affirmed in contemporary times. The restricted imagination and possibilities of existence that Andreotti refers to limits the frames through which the participants expect and experience the educational encounter. This is indicated in Maria’s inability to begin to imagine the possibilities of other existences or ways of being as she encountered them, and is illustrative of Camila’s admission that she is looking for someone or something to help her to justify her beliefs, to reaffirm her commitment to and investment in the promises of capitalism, and her reassertion of rational science as the ultimate source of knowledge. Camila’s insistence on seeking an answer, a solution, and/or a fix that might bring progress, absolution and tweaks to the system in order for others to benefit show the way in which a commitment to seeing one’s own truths confirmed and therefore not learning one’s privileges as loss inhibits a search for knowledge that is independent of these reaffirming desires. Only in learning that the ways of knowing that one is rooted in are preventing you from seeing something else can you begin to access other ways of knowing and being, the beginnings of which were demonstrated in Will’s transcript. The possibility for affective justice is, therefore, conditioned by cognitive justice.  Throughout the text, I have argued that there is a need for students to learn how to face complexity and uncertainty and that the north-south mobility experience provides a rich context  - 113 -  in which to provoke such encounters. However, I would like to reassert here why I think that is a crucial component of education for/in current times. It is not just about facing uncertainty for uncertainty’s sake. The (epistemological and ontological) uncertainty is the cognitive component of what allows for a pursuit of affective justice. By relating to knowledge differently, we can begin to shift our desires from structures and systems that reassert and reaffirm our mastery and innocence in global social change and impact. The investments in these narratives often prevent us from investing in the difficult process of engaging with others without centering ourselves (despite the discomfort that this entails).  If by tapping into uncertainty that allows us to question, as Camila said, ‘why my way is right’, or like Will said, begin ‘to interrupt, to question myself and be like why am I having these reactions?’, only then can we begin to engage with communities in ways that do not repeat the same processes that have historically structured these processes. The terms of engagement widen once we reorient the desire ‘to be made to feel a certain way’, as Camila says, and thus open the possibilities for a relational justice of sorts. To conclude, in this exploratory investigation into a north-south mobility experience attempting to move towards a post-critical orientation, it is clear that cognitive justice in its embrace of complexity, uncertainty and plurality can provide the opening in epistemological and ontological certainty that might disrupt the re-investments in reaffirming affective economies. The second proposition is to see “education as an uncoercive rearrangement of desires” (Andreotti, 2014b). If our affective investments are limited by the frames we are socialized in and that constrain our ability to imagine other epistemological and ontological existences, as seen in the interviews, the possibilities for relational justice are limited. This call for a post-critical approach to north-south mobility experiences places a hopefulness in these educational environments and encounters to provoke, disrupt and challenge learners’ commitments to affective economies that constrain their ability to imagine and engage in ways that do not satisfy and reproduce these desires.  A pursuit of affective justice requires an engagement with cognitive justice, and together the two condition the possibility for a relational justice. Forming relationships that are not framed by learners’ previous narratives and desires and expectations of mastery, protagonism and entitlement of their learning is only possible when they have cognitively and affectively been undone and this requires what Will gestured towards: an unloading process. Without this shift in our relationship to knowledge, we will continue to form  - 114 -  and enact relationships that are informed by the same entitlements, desires for mastery, and innocence that continue to characterize North-South mobility experiences.  The final proposition is ‘learning (to play) the double bind (rather than to solve it)’ which involves “learning to live with contradictory instructions, paradoxical imperatives, conflicting demands” (Andreotti, 2014b, p.105). This is important in encouraging learners to sit with the discomfort that can potentially be unearthed in the pursuit of cognitive, affective, relational justice, but more importantly it reminds me that a post-critical approach itself is not going to be the save all tool that will revamp education- this is evident in the differing effects that the program had on the participants. It is also a reminder of my own ‘moves to innocence’ that can be traced in the production of this research (Tuck & Yang, 2012). Andreotti (2014b) writes that: Spivak is one of the few theorists who will not offer us comfort in answers that will give us a key to occupy that innocent and benevolent place beyond critique that we have learned to aspire to: a space where we are not complicit with that which we criticize. Instead she gives us a language to name that which is difficult to speak of (p.106).  It is in this naming and generating of yet unclear and uncertain possibilities in the context of north-south mobility experiences that this research seeks to contribute considerations of cognitive, affective and relational justice and how they might be pursued and facilitated pedagogically. This combination of a pursuit of cognitive and affective justice is what characterizes a post-critical approach, and points to it as a potential educational space for provoking relational justice.  Ultimately, this thesis is a reiteration of Sousa Santos’ claim that global social justice is only possible with global cognitive justice and my reiteration claims that global cognitive justice is not only the prerequisite to a shifting and undefined global social justice, but plays an essential and required role in establishing the possibilities for affective and relational justice. This relational justice (stemming from cognitive and affective justice) that might allow for new and different forms of existence that have the potential to experiment is precisely the pursuit of a post-critical approach.   As the research data showed, the participants brought their expectations for an education that facilitated and rewarded description and prescription (seeing a problem, identifying it, identifying one’s role in it, and working to fix it). This is not a critique of individual participants or their expectations, but rather something to note for what it says about approaches to university education more generally and the discourses that surround higher education. It is unsurprising  - 115 -  that the student narratives uncovered an impulse to undertake action and to correct the wrongs they confronted because this type of solving based on ascertaining knowledge of the problem and then deciding what solution is best is one that is emphasized in their university education. As Osberg (2017) mentions, “it is generally accepted that education is at least partly responsible for the kinds of futures that emerge” (p.13). The relationship, however, between education, action, and what kind of future emerges must be seriously considered. However, I contend the possibilities emerging from pedagogical experiments that attempt this are shaped, in part, by the extent to which a post-critical approach is considered and taken seriously in higher education more widely. As detailed in this research, one of the challenges to implementing a post-critical approach to north-south mobility experiences is not that it is not necessary, beneficial or useful, but rather that it is unintelligible to the higher education institutions that it operates within. Osberg (2017) highlights the need for a post-critical educational philosophy that goes beyond the context of north-south mobility experiences and points towards shifting the action oriented tendencies that currently dominate higher education in relation to creating a ‘better’ more ‘sustainable’ future away from fixed teleologies and towards engaging with the not-yet-possible. Osberg (2017) elaborates that: “to cease colonizing the future from the perspective of someone’s normative vision of a good future, one derived from extrapolation, a different approach altogether is required.” While this relates to one of the emerging challenges in how student reactions to the discomfort, uncertainty, and complexity they encounter in north-south mobility experiences can reaffirm their commitments to social change in which they are working for the betterment of a universal humanity, it has wider implications (as do the findings of this research) on higher education and its relationship with social change more broadly. This different approach that opens up a possibility for a non-normative responsibility, one that is necessary because the effects of actions in the present on the future are not necessarily knowable (Osberg, 2017). This calls for learners to act in ways that are responsible without a guarantee of feedback or immediate reward, progress, change or impact. This is not a nihilistic call for people to then just do what they want because the future is unknown, but rather a proposal to encourage educational encounters that do not expect fixing or solving in ways that result in the subsequent or envisioned reward or satisfaction that we have been conditioned to receive. The word ‘outcomes’ litters this entire text, and the choice to keep it in is intentional- it is a signifier of the ongoing challenges of structuring, implementing and even imagining educational encounters that do not  - 116 -  lead to something, that are not instrumental for social change. This preoccupation with outcomes that logically flow from knowledge ascertained through education is present at many levels of analysis and constrains the ability to engage with responsible action and relations in other and undetermined ways. The participants expected certain outcomes, and so did I- the current context and climate of higher education demands outcomes in quantifiable and representable forms. The desire, therefore, of wanting to fix, to (ab)solve, to change or make better that emerged through the participant narratives is not unique to the individuals who voiced it, but rather is indicative of the socialization and investments in narratives of ‘correcting’ and ‘solving’ the present for an imagined future on the behalf of a universal humanity that circulate in modern universities. The impetus for a post-critical approach which supports the development of a disposition of openness in how one relates to self, others and knowledge is therefore key in engaging in ways of being and with ways of knowing that are guided by the desire for something else. If education is tied morally and politically to the possible futures, it is imperative that work be done to allow learners to engage differently with the ways of knowing and the ways of being that we have inherited, been socialized into and accepted as the norm. The ability to imagine outside of these is an enormous task for education to support, and this case study is an attempt to explore the contexts in which such an imagining might be provoked and/or possible.       - 117 -  References Adichie, C. (2009). The Danger of a Single Story. TED: Ideas Worth Spreading - Ted Conferences, LLC. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Ihs241zeg Altbach, P. & U. Teichler.(2001). Globalized University Internationalization and Exchanges in a Globalized University. Journal of Studies in International Education, 5(1), 5-25.  Alaasutari, H. & Andreotti, V. (2015). Framing and Contesting the Dominant Global Imaginary of North-South Relations: Identifying and Challenging the Dominant Global Imaginary of North-South Relations: Identifying and Challenging Socio-Cultural Hierarchies’, Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review, 20, pp.64-92. Andreotti, V. (2017). Decolonizing Teacher Education. Presentation, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.  March 10 2017.  Andreotti, V. (2016a). (re)imagining education as an un-coercive re-arrangement of desires. Other Education: The Journal of Educational Alternatives, 5(1): 79-88.  Andreotti, V. (2016b). Research and pedagogical notes: The educational challenges of imagining  the world differently. Canadian Journal of Development Studies,37(1), 101-112.  Andreotti, V. (2016c). Response: The difficulties and paradoxes of  interrupting colonial totalitarian logicalities. Philosophy of Education Archive, 284-288.  Andreotti, V. (2016d). Multi-layered Selves: Colonialism, Decolonization and Counter-Intuitive Learning Spaces. http://artseverywhere.ca/2016/10/12/multi-layered-selves/ Andreotti, V. (2015). Global Citizenship Education Otherwise: Pedagogical and Theoretical Insights. In Decolonizing Global Citizenship Education, (Eds.) Abdi, A., Shultz, L., & Pillay, T. SensePublishers.  Andreotti, V., Stein, S., Ahenakew, C., & Hunt, D. (2015), Mapping interpretations of decolonization in the context of higher education. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 4(1): 21-40.  Andreotti, V. (2014a). Critical Literacy: Theories and Practices in Development Education. Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review, 14(Autumn): 12-32. Andreotti, V. (2014b). Book review of ‘An Aesthetic Education in the Era of Globalization’, Gayatri C. Spivak. Other Education - The Journal of Educational Alternatives, 3(2), 102-107. Andreotti, V. (2014c). Conflicting Epistemic Demands in Poststructuralist and Postcolonial Engagements With Questions of Complicity in Systemic Harm, Educational Studies: A Journal of the American Educational Studies Association, 50:4, 378-397.   - 118 -  Andreotti, V. (2011). Actionable Postcolonial Theory in Education. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. [introduction].  Andreotti, V. & L. M. de Souza. (2008). “Learning to Read the World Through Other Eyes”. Global Education, Derby: United Kingdom.  Andreotti, V. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship. Policy and Practice: A Development Education Review.  Angod, L. (2015). Behind and Beyond the Ivy: How schools produce elites through the bodies of racial others. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Toronto.  Astin, A. & Sax, L. (1998). How Undergraduates Are Affected by Service Participation. Journal of College Student Development, 39(3).  Barnett, R. (2009) Knowing and becoming in the higher education curriculum, Studies in Higher Education, 34:4, 429-440. Bernard, H. (2006). Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Altamira Press, UK: Oxford. Billig, S. & A. Waterman. (2012). Studying Service-Learning: Innovations in Education Research Methodology. Routledge: New York, US.   Boyle-Baise, M., Brown, R., Hsu, M., Jones, D., Prakash, A., Rausch, M., Vitols, S. & Z. Wahlquist. (2006). Learning Service or Service Learning: Enabling the Civic. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 18(1), 17-26.  Braidotti, R. (2012). Becoming-world. In R. Braidottie, P. Hanafin & B. Blaagaard (Eds.), After cosmopolitanism (pp.9-27). New York, NY: Routledge.  Bringle, R., Hatcher, J., & S. Jones. (2011). International Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Research. Stylus Publishing.  Bruce, J. (2015). On racism and prejudice: exploring relational possibilities for service-learning within physical education in teacher education. Asia Pacific Journal of Sport, Health and Physical Education. 6(2), 233-244.   Bruce, J. (2013). Dancing on the edge: a self-study exploring relational possibilities in physical education, Sport, Education and Society, 18(6), 807-824.  Bruce, J. & Brown, S. (2010). Conceptualising service-learning in global times. Critical Literacy: Theories and Practices, 4 (1).    - 119 -  Bryan, A. (2013). ‘The impulse to help.’ (Post)humanitarianism in an era of the ‘new’ development advocacy. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning, 5(2), 5-29.  Burman, A. (2017). The political ontology of climate change: moral meteorology, climate justice, and the coloniality of reality in the Bolivian Andes. Journal of Political Ecology, 24.   Butin, D. (2003). Of What Use Is It? Multiple Conceptualizations Of Service Learning Within Education. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 1674-1692.   Cermak, M., Christiansen, J., Finnegan, A., Gleeson, A., White, S., & D. Leach. (2011). Displacing activism? The impact of international service trips on understandings of social change. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 6(1), 5-19.   Cohen, D. & B. Crabtree. (2006). Qualitative Research Guidelines Project. http://www.qualres.org/HomeFiel-3650.html  Chambers, T. (2009). A Continuum of Approaches to Service-Learning within Canadian Post-secondary Education. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 39(2), 77-100.   Charania, G. (2011). Grounding the global: A call for more situated practices of pedagogical and political engagement. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies,10 (3), 351-371.  Clarke, I., Flaherty, T., Wright, N., & McMillen, R. (2009). Student intercultural proficiency from study abroad programs. Journal of Marketing Education.   Crabtree, R. (2008). Theoretical Foundations for International Service Learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 15(1).   Dullabaum, N. (2011). A Pedagogy for Global Understanding- intercultural dialogue: from theory to practice.  Policy Futures in Education, 9(1).   Ellsworth, E. (1989). Why doesn’t this feel empowering? Working Through the Repressive Myths of Critical Pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 59(3): 297-325.    Epprecht, M. (2004) Work-Study Abroad Courses in International Development Studies: Some Ethical and Pedagogical Issues, Canadian Journal of Development Studies / Revue canadienne d'études du développement, 25:4, 687-706.   Eyler, J. & Giles, D. (1999). Where’s the Learning in Service-Learning? Jossey-Bass higher and Adult Education Series. Jossey-Bass, Inc., San Francisco, CA.    Farley, L. (2009). Radical Hope: Or, the Problem of Uncertainty in History Education, Curriculum Inquiry, 39:4, 537-554.   - 120 -  Galetta, A. & Cross, W., E. (2013). Mastering the Semi-Structured Interview and Beyond: From Research Design to Analysis and Publication. New York: NYU Press.  Garcia, N. & N. Longo. (2013). Going Global: Re-Framing Service-Learning in an Interconnected World. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 17(2).   Gaztambide-Fernandez, R. & Howard, A. (2013). Social Justice, Deferred Complicity, and the Moral Plight of the Wealthy. A Response to “‘With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility’: Privileged Students’ Conceptions of Justice-Oriented Citizenship”. Democracy and Education, 21(1).   Gaztambide-Fernandez, R. (2011). Possible Impossibles:Four Pedagogies for the Present and Pressing Moment. Curriculum Inquiry, 41:3.    Gaztambide-Fernandez, R. (2010).Interruption and Imagination in Curriculum and Pedagogy, or How to Get Caught Inside a Strange Loop . Curriculum Inquiry, 40:3.    Golay, P. (2006). The Effects of Study Abroad on the Development of Global Mindedness Among Students Enrolled in International programs at Florida State University. Unpublished doctoral thesis.   Grain, K. & D. Lund. (2017). The Social Justice Turn: Cultivating ‘Critical Hope’ in an Age of Despair. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 45-59.   Grandy, G. (2010). Intrinsic case study. In A. J. Mills, G. Durepos & E. Wiebe (Eds.), Encyclpedia of case study research (pp.500-501). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd.   Grusky, S. (2000). International Service Learning: A Critical Guide from an Impassioned Advocate. American Behavioural Scientist, 43(5).   Guest, G., Namey, E., & Mitchell, M. (2013). Participant observation. In Collecting qualitative data, pp.75-112. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.  Heron, B. (2007). Desire for development: Whiteness, gender, and the helping imperative. Wilfrid Laurier University Press.  Himley, M. (2004). Facing (Up to) ‘the Stranger’ in Community Service Learning. College Composition and Communication. 55(3), pp. 416-438.  Hodgson, N., Vlieghe, J. & P. Zamojski. (2017). Education and the Love for the World: Articulating a post-critical educational philosophy. Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain, Annual Conference. New College, Oxford.   Hutchison, R. (2009). Encyclopedia of urban studies: Favela. Sage Publications.   Jefferess, D. (2008). Global citizenship and the cultural politics of benevolence. Critical Literacy: Theories and Practices, 2(1), 27-36.  - 121 -   Jorgenson, S. (2014). (De)colonizing global citizenship: a case study of North American study abroad programs in Ghana. Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of Alberta.  Kennedy, R. (2015). Toward a Cosmopolitan Curriculum of Forgiveness. Curriculum Inquiry, p.373-393.   Kerr, J. (2013). Pedagogical Thoughts on Knowing Bodies: The Teacher Education Encounters the Elder and the Phronimos. (Unpublished thesis).   Kiely, R. & E. Hartman. (2014). Pushing Boundaries: Introduction to the Global Service Learning Special Section. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning,55-63.    Kiely, R. (2004). Chameleon with a complex: searching for transformation in international service learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 10(2), pp.5-20.  Kinvall, C. (2004). Globalization and Religious Nationalism: Self, Identity, and the Search for Ontological Security. Political Psychology, 25(5), 741-767.   Kvale, S. (2008). Conducting an interview. In Doing interviews (Book 2 of The SAGE qualitative research kit, pp.52-67). London: SAGE. <e-book> Retrievable from http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.4135/9781849208963  LaMaster, K. (2001). Enhancing Preservice Teachers Field Experiences Through the Addition of a Service-Learning Component. The Journal of Experiential Education, 24(1): 27-33.   Lather, P. (1995). Post-critical Pedagogies: A Feminist Reading. In Postmodernism, Postcolonialism and Pedagogy, McLaren, P. (Ed.), High Press Academic: Somerville, Australia.   Manley, T., Buffa, A., Dube, C. & L. Reed. Putting the Learning in Service Learning: From Soup Kitchen Models to the Black Metropolis Model. Education and Urban Society, 38(2).  Martin, F., & Griffiths, H. (2012). Power and representation: a postcolonial reading of global partnerships and teacher development through North–South study visits. British Educational Research Journal, 38(6): 907-927 Marullo, S. & Edwards, B. (2000). From charity to justice. The American behavioral Scientist. 43(5).   McBride, A., Brav, J., Menon, N. & M. Sherraden. (2006). Limitations of civic service: critical perspectives. Community Development Journal, 41(3), 307-320.  McClam,T., Diambra, J., Burton, B., Fuss, A., & D. Fudge. (2008). An Analysis of a Service Learning Project: Students’ Expectations, Concerns, and Reflections. Journal of Experiential Education, 30(3).    - 122 -  Mitchell, D., T. (2008). Traditional vs. Critical Service-Learning: Engaging the Literature to Differentiate Two Models. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 14(2), pp.50-65.  Osberg, D. (2017). Education and the Future: Rethinking the Role of Anticipation and Responsibility in Multicultural and Technological Societies In Poli R (ed) Handbook of Anticipation, Springer, 1-20.  Payne, P. (2016). What next? Post-critical materialisms in environmental education, The Journal of Environmental Education, 47(2): 169-178.   Pitt, A. & Britzman, D. P.  (2003) Speculations on qualities of difficult knowledge in teaching and learning: an experiment in psychoanalytic research, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(6), 755-776.  Pompa, L. (2002). Service Learning as Crucible: Reflections on Immersion, Context, Power and Transformation. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 67-76.  Pluim., G., W., J. & S. R. Jorgenson (2012) A reflection on the broader, systemic impacts of youth volunteer abroad programmes: a Canadian perspective, Intercultural Education, 23:1, 25-38.  Porfilio, B. & Hickman, H. (2011). Critical Service Learning as Radical Pedagogy: A Project of Student Agency in Action. In C. S. Malott (Ed.), Critical Constructions: Studies on Education and Society. Queens College/CUNY.    Prentice, M. & Garcia, R. (2000). Service Learning: The Next Generation in Education. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 24:1, 19-26.  Reist, S. (2016). Can the Quilombolo Model of Collective Land Titling Work in Rio’s Favelas? Unpublished Thesis, Duke University.   Reynolds, P. (2005). How Service Learning Experiences Benefit Physical Therapist Students` Professional Development: A Grounded Theory Study. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 19(1), 41-54.   Rhoads, R. A. (1997). Community service and higher learning: Explorations of the caring self. New York: SUNY Press.   Saldana, J. (2016). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. SAGE Publications LTD.   Spivak, G. (2004). Righting Wrongs. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 103(2), 523-581. de Sousa Santos, B. (2014). Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. (pp. 212-235). Boulder, CO: Paradigm Press.  Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.   - 123 -  Stein, S. (2017). Contested Imaginaries of global justice in the internationalization of higher education. Unpublished PhD Thesis. The University of British Columbia.   Stein, S., Andreotti, V., Hunt, D. & R. Susa. (2017). The Educational Challenge of Unraveling the Fantasies of Ontological Security. Diaspora, Indigenous and Minority Education.  Stein, S. (2016). Rethinking the Ethics of Internationalization: Five Challenges for Higher Education. UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies, 12(2)  Stein, S., Andreotti, V., Bruce, J., and Suša, R. (2016) "Towards Different Conversations About the Internationalization of Higher Education," Comparative and International Education / Éducation Comparée et Internationale, 45(1).  Stein, S. & Andreotti, V. (2016). “Cash, competition, or charity: international students and the global imaginary”. Higher Education, 72(2).    Taylor, L. (2012). Beyond Paternalism: Global Education with Pre-Service Teachers as a Practice of Implication. In Andreotti, V. & de Souza, M.,T.,M.,L (Eds.), Postcolonial Perspectives on Global Citizenship Education. New York: Routledge.  Tiessen, R. & P. Kumar. (2013). Ethical challenges encountered on learning/volunteer abroad programmes for students in international development studies in Canada: youth perspectives and educator insights. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 34(3).  Tiessen, R. & Grantham, K. (2017). Overview: North-South Student Mobility in Canada’s Universities. Issue briefs on North-South student mobility. Universities Canada: The Voice of Canada’s Universities.   Trilokekar, R. & Rasmi, S. (2011). Student perceptions of international education and study abroad: a pilot study at York University, Canada. Intercultural Education, 22(6).   Trilokekar, R. & Kukar, P. (2011). Disorienting experiences during study abroad: Reflections of pre-service teacher candidates. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, pp.1141-1150.   Tuck, E. & K. Yang. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education and Society. 1(1): 1-40.   UNESCO. (November 19, 1974). Recommendation concerning Education for International Understanding, Co-operation and Peace and Education relating to Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.  UNESCO 1974: Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13088&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html  Vande Berg, M., Paige, R. & Lou, K. (2012). Student Learning Abroad: What Our Students Are Learning, What They’re Not, And What We Can Do About It. Stylus Publishing, Virginia, US.  Wade, R. C. (2000). From a distance: Service-learning and social justice. In C. R. O’Grady (Ed.), Integrating service learning and multicultural education in colleges and universities (pp. 93-111). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.  - 124 -  Whiteman, M. (2015). Kujiunga: Host community perspectives on hosting young international volunteers in Eldoret, Kenya. Unpublished Thesis. The University of British Columbia.  Wright, E. (2015). North to South Mobility: Study Abroad in Ecuador, Towards an Understanding of Decolonial Education. Unpublished thesis.  Zemach-Bersin, T. (2007). Global citizenship and study abroad: It’s all about US. Critical Literacy: Theories and Practices, 1(2), 16-28. Zembylas, M. (2015). Theorizing “Difficult Knowledge” in the Aftermath of the “Affective Turn”: Implications for Curriculum and Pedagogy in Handling Traumatic Representations. Curriculum Inquiry, 44(3), 390-412.        - 125 -  Appendices Appendix A: Consent Form University of British Columbia          Educational Studies Ponderosa Commons 3071        2075 Lower Mall,           Vancouver, BC          V6T 1Z2   Consent Form for Investigating a Relational Approach to Service Learning in Brazil  Principal Investigator: Vanessa Andreotti, Faculty of Education, University of British Columbia. Tel:  Email: vanessa.andreotti@ubc.ca  Co-investigator: Alexis Sutherland, Graduate Student in Educational Studies, University of British Columbia Tel: 778-834-1145 Email: a.sutherland@alumni.ubc.ca  The study is being funded in part by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.  Purpose: We want to learn more about how to produce meaningful cross-cultural educational encounters that allow for transformation as a result. This study will help us learn more about how programs, like the Social Innovation and Community Development program, that take a relational approach to education, lead to transformation and what that experience is like. This study will help us learn more about cross-cultural higher education programs. We are inviting people like you who are enrolled in such programs to help us.   Study Procedures: Your involvement will entail a semi-structured interview for 1.5 hours where you will be asked about your experience of transformation as an outcome of your involvement with the Social Innovation and Community Development program in Fortaleza, Brazil. With your permission, the interview will be recorded and then transcribed to accurately record your views and opinions. If you would prefer the interview not be recorded, written notes alone will be taken.   - 126 -  Project Outcomes: Although the project outcomes will be determined by the research findings, the results of this study will be reported in a graduate thesis and may also be published in journal articles and books.  Potential Benefits: There are no explicit benefits to you by taking part in this study. However, in the future, others may benefit from what we learn in this study.   Potential Risks: We do not think there is anything in this study that could cause you harm. Taking part in an interview can be stressful, please let the co-investigator know if you have any concerns. You can end the interview at any time, and you do not have to answer any questions that make you feel uncomfortable. You can also withdraw your participation in the project at any time.   Confidentiality: Your confidentiality will be respected.  Information that discloses your identity will not be released without your consent unless required by law. All hard copies of documents and recordings will be identified only by code number and kept in a locked safe. You will not be identified by name in either the recording or the interview transcript. Hard copies of the interview notes and transcripts will be stored in a locked safe in the office of the Principal Investigator and electronic copies will be kept on the local hard drives of the co-investigator’s computer which is password protected. Participants will not be identified by name in the completed study. Only Alexis Sutherland and Vanessa Andreotti, the co-investigators of this research study, will have access to the recordings and raw data which could include information that might identify you.   Contact for information about the study: If you have any questions or desire further information with respect to this study, you may contact Alexis Sutherland (778-834-1145; email: a.sutherland@alumni.ubc.ca)   Contact for concerns about the rights of research subjects: If you have any concerns about your treatment or rights as a research subject, you may contact the Research Subject Information Line in the UBC Office of Research Services at 604-822-8598 or if long distance e-mail to RSIL@ors.ubc.ca.   Consent: Your participation in this study is entirely voluntary and you may refuse to participate or withdraw from the study at any time. Your signature below indicates that you have received a copy of this consent form for your own records. Your signature indicates that you consent to participate in this study.   ____________________________________________________ Participant Signature, Date   - 127 -    Your signature below indicates that you consent to conduct an interview and have the co-investigator take notes during that interview.   ____________________________________________________ Participant Signature, Date    Your signature below indicate that you consent to conduct an interview and have the co-investigator take notes during the interview AND have it audio recorded.   ____________________________________________________ Participant Signature, Date           - 128 -  Appendix B: Interview Guides Learning outcomes, shifts, transformations What (if anything) has been transformed? How does this relate to the way you think, act, feel in the world? How does what you have learned affect what you will do, think, believe when you get home? How do you think the conditions for transformation and/or interconnection can be created?  Discomfort  Throughout the process/program, can you map moments of discomfort/joy  When/where were you guarded and when/where were you vulnerable in the process? Can you identify with feeling overwhelmed/paralysed in what to do? How has being here given you insight into how to keep moving? How can those feelings be productive?  Relationships with people What have been the most meaningful relationships throughout your time here? What are the biggest barriers that you see in creating horizontal relationships?  In what situations was it difficult to relate to people? What made it difficult to relate?  Dialogue  In what circumstances is dialogue/talking relevant/useful/helpful and in what circumstances does it get in the way?  Relationship to knowledge  How have you been pushed to try to see poverty/wealth/knowledge/development differently? Or if not at all what has been cemented for you through the program- ie what will you take away about how these themes are interwoven in your life back home?  How can we engage and be taught by different systems of knowledge and being while being aware of their gifts, limitations, ignorances and contradictions?  Complicity In what ways could you feel ideas about superiority and inferiority challenged and in what ways were they reinforced? How do you see yourself as part of the problem and solution?  - 129 -  What contradictions did you feel about your participation in the program or how it was structured?  Pedagogical considerations  How did the reflections contribute to your experience- rio, manaus, salvador? In what ways were the tools useful? What would be more useful for your process and experience?  Future model Do you think it’s possible for study abroad to be ethical, meaningful, decolonizing? In what ways can it never be?  What is needed beyond/in place of more time for horizontal relationships?   Identity framing this experience  What role did your identity play in your experience here?      - 130 -  Appendix C: Pedagogical Tools Introduced as Method for Data Collection Visiting, talking and interacting: (re)framing tool  Theories of change  From where you stand, where would you place the organization you are visiting on the map at this point?   How do you interpret what the organization defines as the problem, the nature of the problem, the proposed solution and their role in it?   Justice focus How does the organization address or prioritize each/any of these notions of justice:  1. Ecological justice: social-ecological integration, food security, soil regeneration, “living well” as opposed to “living better” 2. Cognitive Justice: identifying the limits of current paradigms and creating new ‘dispositions of engagement’ with mainstream and alternative knowledge systems and technologies; 3. Affective Justice: recognizing our collective need for healing from historical and inter-generational trauma, prioritizing collective well-being; 4. Relational Justice: dismantling divisions caused by inherited social, cultural, economic and epistemological hierarchies that hinder symmetrical relationships; 5. Economic Justice: analysing and acting upon the systemic reproduction of inequalities through unjust systems of trade, governance and value production, while identifying viable possibilities for economic dignity 6. Intergenerational Justice: securing relationships and forms of organization that can tap the wisdom and learn from the mistakes of past generations and that uphold the health and wellbeing of present and future generations.  - 131 -   Ideas of poverty and wealth  What is the understanding of poverty and wealth that informs the work of the organization?  How does this organization approach the issue of poverty?   Alleviating Effects Transforming Causes Material Poverty A B Existential Poverty C D  See unit on poverty (p.31-38): http://developmenteducation.ie/media/documents/Learning_to_Read_the_World_Through_Other.pdf  Self-reflexive questions (short version)   What perceptions, projections, desires and expectations inform my initial engagement with this organization or issue? What disposition of engagement am I bringing to this visit (see table)? How am I reading this context? Where does this reading come from? How am I being read in this context? Where does this reading come from? What narratives are being offered to me based on this reading? How do you see yourself as connected to both the problem and the solution that the organization is trying to address? What cultural ignorances do I continue to embody? What social tensions am I failing to recognize?   Perceived challenges, paradoxes and limitations  What tensions have you observed in this visit? What tensions have you observed in your own responses to this visit? What have you learned about the issue, the context, and yourself as a result of this visit?      - 132 -  Appendix D: Social Innovation and Community Development Spring 2017 Cohort Itinerary March 13-19: Orientation: Experiential Portuguese, Tour of Fortaleza, Human and Natural    Geography with Jose Albano March 20-29: Portuguese Lessons and Proposal Development March 30-April 3: Portuguese Lessons and Social Justice Seminar with Community Partners (in Bom Jardim) April 4-7: Coloniality and Decolonization Seminar with Professor Eduardo Oliveira *April 9: I arrived April 10-11: Portuguese Lessons and Proposal Development April 12: Banco Palmas Visit: Solidarity Economy April 13-16: Portuguese Lessons and Proposal Development April 17-19: Pedagogical tool development with Professor Vanessa de Oliveira Andreotti April 21-23: Visit to MST Settlement April 24-29: Portuguese Lessons and Proposal Development April 29-May 3: Rio de Janeiro May 4-6: Paraty: Nativos Paraty May 7-13: Manaus May 13-19: Salvador May 19-June 11: Community Development Project (ISL component) June 11-18: Write up and presentations June 12: Interviews were conducted with Participants 1, 2, and 4 June 13: Interview with Participant 3 was conducted June 20: Interview with Participant 5 was conducted      - 133 -  Appendix E: Revised Version of LACB 3000 and 3005   Social Justice, Post-Colonialism, and Civil Society in Northeastern Brazil    LACB 3000 (3 credits / 45 hours)   SIT Study Abroad Program: Brazil: Social Innovation and Community Development     Course Description This course is the first component of a three part course series which aims to explore the devastating impacts of colonialism on the peoples of Brazil particularly the indigenous and afro-brazilian populations. Additionally, the series examines how “coloniality” continues to inform and define relations of domination and oppression in this continental nation. Through an examination of cutting edge theories of coloniality developed by Latin American social theorist and an intensive immersion in the lived experience of communities students are challenged to examine their own societies and  lived experiences for a deeper understanding of how colonial past shape their relationships with the “other”.  This first course is intended to provide an academic foundation upon which to build deeper understandings, engagement and relations as the course series progresses. The course provides an in-depth look at the process of political and social transformation at the grass-roots level in Northeastern Brazil, as well as the persistent and often conflicting interaction of new political actors in the country that has become a living “social laboratory”. The course provides the broad and contextualized historical, political and social background necessary to understand the emancipation struggles of indigenous, African, and Afro-descendants. It addresses long-standing issues of social exclusion and marginalization, focusing in particular on indigenous populations, women, children, and the landless and these groups’ struggle for social justice. Students will experience and explore how Brazil’s landless and marginalized groups pursue their own path toward social justice and development. The course will offer students the opportunity to engage in observation, discussion and critical reflection, examining at the local level critical global issues affecting the economy, social conditions and health of Brazil’s landless and marginalized peoples. The course considers how religious communities of the African Matrix, indigenous communities, quilombo communities, NGOs and other groups historically and currently offer ways to rethink human relations, within a social justice framework, emphasizing solidarity, fraternity, re-centering knowledge and generating new ideas. These themes are explored from a post-colonial, decolonizing and critical grounding.    Learning Outcomes  - 134 -  By the end of the course, students will be able to:  ● Identify and describe the historical links to ongoing local struggles and efforts to achieve social justice and development; ● Engage in culturally appropriate discussions on social justice and development issues; ● Identify, describe, analyze and assess the ways in which scholars address and frame questions of social justice and development; ● Identify, describe and analyze social, political and cultural forces shaping contemporary Brazilian democracy; ● Identify and use scholarly approaches to social justice and inequality; ● Examine and explain the pressures exerted by organizations of civil society for greater inclusion, recognition and protection under the law; ● Articulate how the transition from dictatorship to democratic institutions has forged widespread demands for social justice, human rights and social equity; ● Cite the main theoretical contributions of postcolonial theorists and apply some of their concepts to current research;  Course Objectives The objectives for this course are to:  ● Provide students with historical background and knowledge about social, economic, political and cultural issues which have forged the present day reality of Brazil in general, and Northeast Brazil in particular. ● Develop a basic conceptual and practical understanding of contemporary social justice and development issues in Brazil. ● Gain an understanding of the construction of global citizenship and democracy. ● Explore the role and contribution of all major ethnic groups to the creation of contemporary Brazilian culture and democratic institutions. ● Consider the issue of social justice in-depth, using the Brazilian situation as a case study. ● Provide scholarly tools to process and critically analyze historical information, different schools of thought, and varied interpretations about social justice and governance in Brazil.  Language of Instruction English and Portuguese    Course Schedule      Pre-Arrival: Before August 28, 2017 Journal Prompt:  Please brainstorm a list of words that come to your mind when you think of Brazil, Fortaleza and South America. Be free and creative - don’t censor yourself. Write one page of your thoughts about what you hope and expect to find and see there as well as why you have enrolled in this *Please be aware that lectures and activities may vary to take advantage of any emerging events, to accommodate changes in our lecturers’ availability, and to respect any changes that would affect student safety. Students will be notified if this occurs.   - 135 -  course, what you hope to experience, learn or gain and what concerns or worries you have going into it. Bring this document with you as we will discuss it during our orientation week.   Readings:  Week 1: Orientation: August 28 - September 3rd 2017 This week is intended for you to explore some of the new-ness that arriving has to offer and to get situated, if not settled, in where you will be living and learning for the next few months. This initial period can be overwhelming and so we will start with course details, introductions to your homestays, introductions to the city and an overview of what is to come.   Journal Prompt:  Why have you chosen a study abroad/service learning experience? What does that convey about your background? What values are most important to you and are they universal or local? As you read about historical experiences in Fortaleza, consider which of these events occurred because outsiders thought they knew what was best for locals, what does this suggest about the idea of universal ethics and rights  Required readings:  Why we travel: http://www.salon.com/2000/03/18/why/  Bruce, J. (2013). Service learning as a pedagogy of interruption. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning, 5(1), 33-47.  Watch: www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story/transcript?language=en   Week 2: September 4th- September 10th: Situating Fortaleza Building on considerations related to the experience of slavery and the colonial history of Brazil, this module highlights the enduring structures of individual and structural violence that continue to characterize social, political economic and cultural relations. Students will explore how these structures and systems shape the life experience of marginalized groups in Brazil. The module is also designed to engage students in a reflective analysis of how these systems and structures of violence are globalized, normalized and integrated into our daily life and impact the nature and character of our personal relations. Finally, the module seeks to reveal through discussion, debate and analysis how these systems and structures are at the center of global social injustice today.  Journal Prompt:   Readings:  Garmany, Jeff. Situating Fortaleza urban space and uneven development in northeastern Brazil. Cities. 2011  Gondim, Linda and Hallewell, Laurence. Creating the Image of a Modern Fortaleza: Social Inequalities, Political Changes, and the Impact of Urban Design. 2004  - 136 -   Week 3: September 11th- September 17th: Global Citizenship/Brazilian Foundations This week focuses on an exploration into some of the complexities that global citizenship education embodies. We will look critically at our roles in global systems and how we have understood global citizenship with the aim of expanding those possibilities. We will also be continuing to work on developing a foundation through which to understand the issues the organizations we will be visiting with are facing specifically in Brazil.   Journal Prompt:  Readings: Andreotti, V. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship education. Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review, 3, 40-51  Jefferess, D. (2008). Global citizenship and the cultural politics of benevolence. Critical Literacy: Theories and Practices, 2(1), 27-36.  Week 4: September 18th- September 24th: Gender, Race Class and Mental Health Taught at sites in the state of Ceará, this introductory module works to develop a common scholarly frame of reference for students to more fully explore issues of race and class divisions, unequal development, social exclusions, gender inequality, and unequal resource distribution in Northeast Brazil.  Journal Prompt:  How do you understand ethnicity, and how do you feel that is being affected by your experiences here?  Readings:  Week 5: September 25th- October 1st: Alternative Development and Alternatives to Development As part of a course on social innovation and community development, it is essential that we take a moment to consider what exactly it is that we mean by development, according to who, in whose interest and with what effect? We will spend this week uncovering how narratives of progress and development are interpreted differently and how this impacts any organization’s orientation towards social change.   Journal Prompt:  What is development, and what are the potential problems with the definition you are utilizing? Why is the definition you choose better than available alternatives?  Required Readings: Andreotti, V., Stein, S., Ahenakew, C., & Hunt, D. (2015). Mapping interpretations of decolonization in the context of higher education. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 4(1): 21-40.   - 137 -   Stein, S., Hunt, D., Susa, R., & Andreotti, V. (2017). The Educational Challenge of Unraveling the Fantasies of Ontological Security. Diaspora, Indigenous, and Minority Education: Studies of Migration, Integration, Equity and Cultural Survival.  Additional Readings: Stein, S. & Andreotti, V. (2017). Afterword: provisional pedagogies toward imagining global mobilities otherwise. Curriculum Inquiry, 47:1, 135-146.  Stein, S., Andreotti, V., & Susa, R. (2016). ‘Beyond 2015’, within the modern/colonial global imaginary? Global development and higher education. Critical Studies in Education.  Escobar, Arturo, “Beyond the Third World: imperial globality, global coloniality and anti-globalisation Social Movements”, Third World Quarterly, Vol 25, No 1, pp 207-230, 2004.  Week 6: October 2- October 8th: Coloniality and Decolonization In light of the persistence of colonial frameworks within Brazil and the modern world structure, this module focuses on theories of post-colonialism, coloniality and decolonization as  lenses through which to begin to both imagine our relations differently and to be able to assess how our community partners in later parts of the semester envision their roles in decolonization and other forms of resistance against the structures and systems we have analysed up to this point.  *This week you are also enrolled and participating in the CDP Module and Portuguese and thus the coursework here is adjusted accordingly. *October 5th will include a visit to Banco Palmas *October 6th-October 8th will take place at an MST Settlement  Journal Prompt: Reflect on the meaning of community. What communities are you a part of? Explore your communities of choice vs. those of location. How do your personal values relate to your communities of choice. Based on your impressions so far, what are some differences between your community at home and our host community. What are some commonalities? How does community relate to consumerism? What determines community membership? The following could be argued: Geography, nationality, culture, religion, occupation, ethnicity, economic system, choice, and interdependence. Which of these are the strongest influences in your community? Which seem strongest in the host community?  Readings:  Andreotti, Vanessa.  (2012) Education, Knowledge and the Righting of Wrongs. Other Education: The Journal of Educational Alternatives. Pp 19- 31  Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor.Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1).   Evaluation and Grading Criteria  Description of Assignments   - 138 -   Pre-departure Assignments: This will include the analysis of certain pre-departure readings and movies. It will take into account the capacity to analyze and reflect upon the reading.    First Quiz: The evaluation of the first module will be a quiz or short written exam. The objective of the quiz is to evaluate knowledge of some basic social movement theories and also the situation of social movements in Brazil.  Synthesis and Presentation: The evaluation of the second module will be a synthesis and presentation of one of the key concepts of social movements in Brazil. The students will choose one of the topics in which they are most interested, either popular education, social economy, territory, militancy, or gender. They will have to complete a synthesis of the text to be distributed to the group before the class. During the class they will have to give a brief presentation of the text and generate discussion about the topic.   Final Group Presentation: In the evaluation of the third module the students will apply the concepts presented in the first module to the visits completed by the group. They will have to debate the possibility of change that comes from these strategies and social movements.  Participation: Participation refers to attendance, punctuality, attentive listening, and active participation in all classes, discussions, excursions, and other activities. It also means appropriate and respectful behavior. The level, frequency, and quality of students’ participation will be monitored and taken into account.   Journal Writing: While it might seem like keeping a journal is only useful during the CDP module, when you are ‘in the field’, it is important to begin getting used to this type of writing and ensuring that it is useful. As well, it is a reminder that all experiences, in and out of the classroom here, contribute to the learning environment and structure your learning outcomes.   Blog: It is expected that each student contribute one weekly blog post (your given day will be assigned during the first week of this course). This is a collective piece of work that will allow you to both engage critically which each other and observe how each of you processes your interactions and experiences differently, as well as provide a level of transparency to community organizations around what our intentions are and what kind of learning we are partaking in.   Assessment  Pre-departure Assignments  10%  First Quiz    20%  Synthesis and Presentation  30%  Final Group Presentation  30%  Participation    10%    Grading Scale  94-100%  A    - 139 -  90-93%  A- 87-89%  B+ 84-86%  B  80-83%  B- 77-79%  C+ 74-76%  C  70-73%  C- 67-69%  D+ 64-66%  D  Below 64 F    Expectations and Policies   - Show up prepared. Be on time, have your readings completed and points in mind for discussion or clarification. Complying with these elements raises the level of class discussion for everyone. - Have assignments completed on schedule, printed, and done accordingly to the specified requirements. This will help ensure that your assignments are returned in a timely manner. - Ask questions in class. Engage the lecturer. These are often very busy professionals who are doing us an honor by coming to speak….  - Comply with academic integrity policies (no plagiarism or cheating, nothing unethical).  - Respect differences of opinion (classmates’, lecturers, local constituents engaged with on the visits). You are not expected to agree with everything you hear, but you are expected to listen across difference and consider other perspectives with respect.   Please refer to the SIT Study Abroad Student Handbook for policies on academic integrity, ethics, warning and probation, diversity and disability, sexual harassment and the academic appeals process.   Community Action in Brazil LACB 3005 (3 credits / 45 hours)   SIT Study Abroad Program: Brazil: Social Innovation and Community Development         Course Description  PLEASE NOTE: This syllabus is representative of a typical term. Because courses develop and change over time to take advantage of unique learning opportunities, actual course content varies from semester to semester.  - 140 -  While Brazil has a strong higher education and research base, much new knowledge about social transformation is being generated from within local communities. This is the second course in a three part series that comprises the semester and it builds on the academic, theoretical and contextual knowledge students have explored in the previous course. In this seminar, students will explore how knowledge is emerging from social justice and community projects and other less-expected sites. Students will spend the bulk of this seminar visiting select community based projects, NGOs or social movements in Rio de Janeiro, Manaus, and Salvador and discussing key issues with community leaders and organizers. The seminar focuses on the “new knowledge” regarding human development and social transformation constructed within the context of local struggles for liberation and full, equitable participation in society, as well as efforts to create new societies focused on values of collaboration, cooperation, diversity and respect for difference. Education will be facilitated through observation, discussions, debates, group activities, and written work, including a focus on ethics. The objective is to identify and learn about how organizations approach understandings of poverty, wealth, justice and social change and how these inform the social innovations they develop and use in their local communities.   Learning Outcomes  By the end of the course, students will be able to:  1. Identify and describe local organizations’ orientations to poverty and wealth, justice, and social change in their specific efforts to achieve social justice and development;  2. Reflect on the construction of new knowledge on the basis of practical activity;  3. Examine new models that are being implemented of community-based social, political and economic organization;  4. Identify the success and challenges faced by local communities implementing social technologies to combat poverty and strive for social equity;  7. Engage in self-reflexivity to reflect on how they are both being read and reading the context of the visits;   Course Objectives  The objectives for this course are to:   1. Examine what role various social innovations have in social change and what their specific successes and challenges are; 2. Allow students to realize interconnections between the fights the social innovations these local organizations are trying to address and their various struggles facing their respective home communities; 3. Provide students with the opportunity to relate to people living and working in the realm of social innovation at a human level that might open up new relationships and possibilities for global solidarity; 4. Provide students with the tools necessary to understand and participate in socially innovative projects in diverse social communities; 5. Contribute to the understanding of community action and development at the grassroots level;   Language of Instruction English and Portuguese    Course Schedule   Module 1: Pre-departure: Preparing: October 9th- 14th 2017 It is essential that we are well-prepared to go beyond surface level interactions with the organizations that we meet and in order to do so it is our responsibility to have read what they do so that when we meet in person we can get beyond the ‘what, where, when’ questions and focus more on ‘how’ and ‘why’ to lead us somewhere more interesting. Therefore this course has front-loaded the readings. This week, before our departure you will split your time writing your proposal for the CDP and  - 141 -  preparing for the visits. This means that the schedule below should be adhered to for reading so that we will be able to spend one hour each day, discussing some of the main issues presented in these readings and how they relate to the previous course you will have just completed.  PLEASE HAVE READ BY: October 9: -Central Unica das Favelas (CUFA) website: https://www.cufa.org.br/ -Instituto dos Pretos Novos website: http://www.pretosnovos.com.br/ -Engelhart, K. (2014). Is Slum Tourism Really All that Bad? Vice Website. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/slum-tourism-katie-engelhart-412 October 10: Vivencia Pedagogica em Comunidades Tradicionais do Litoral Sul Fluminense. (2017). Nativos Paraty.  October 11: Secoya website: http://www.secoya.org.br/  Nucleo de Estudo da Amazonia Indigena: NEAI/UFAM: http://www.neai.ufam.edu.br/  Forum dos Professores e Agentes de saude indigena do Amazonas (FOREEIA) website: https://www.foreia.com.br/ ** October 12: See Salvador readings  Module 2: Rio de Janeiro: Urban Occupations, Favela Communities and Sustainable Tourism  October 15-21 Through visits to organizations working in Rio related to various struggles based in land conflict that can be pointed to as one of the more visible continuities of colonization in Brazil, students will have the opportunity to meet, discuss, and relate to people who are working for social, economic and political justice in different ways and within different specific contexts. By attempting to uncover some of the complexities facing favela communities, urban housing occupations and radical research institutes, students are encouraged to explore the ways in which global narratives about land, gentrification, income inequality, and discrimination play out in very specific local contexts.  In Parati, students have the opportunity to spend time with an organization that practices sustainable development and tourism as a way to apply the knowledge they have been discussing regarding this topic to the field. The organization serves as an example of a group of people taking ownership over the local circumstances they find themselves facing due to global pressures of ‘big’ tourism and struggles for land and the students have the opportunity to observe how they work to challenge these forces with an ongoing commitment to economic, cognitive, ecological and intergenerational justice.   Required Readings: Central Unica das Favelas (CUFA) website: https://www.cufa.org.br/  Instituto dos Pretos Novos website: http://www.pretosnovos.com.br/  Engelhart, K. (2014). Is Slum Tourism Really All that Bad? Vice Website. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/slum-tourism-katie-engelhart-412  Vivencia Pedagogica em Comunidades Tradicionais do Litoral Sul Fluminense. (2017). Nativos Paraty.    Module 3: Manaus: Engaging with a plurality of knowledge systems  - 142 -  October 22-28 The time spent in Manaus is intended for students to apply some of the skills they have developed in earlier components of the semester, grounded in reflexivity, that allow for them to form different and new relationships with people that might at first seem like they are separate from. Manaus offers students the unique experience of to meet with indigenous groups and aldeias (communities) who are struggling for rights, recognition, respect and preservation through various means. The time spent here focuses on having students learn and unlearn their conceptions about poverty, wealth, success, development, and what it means to ‘live the good life’. By facing and interacting with people who hold different kinds of knowledge and worldview, the time in Manaus is an exercise in relationality which allows for students to see how they are connected to both the problems facing indigenous communities and to what they are fighting for. This week aims to allow students to begin to see both the values and limitations of both their ways of being and knowing as well as those of ‘others’.  Required Readings:  Secoya website: http://www.secoya.org.br/  Nucleo de Estudo da Amazonia Indigena: NEAI/UFAM: http://www.neai.ufam.edu.br/  Forum dos Professores e Agentes de saude indigena do Amazonas (FOREEIA) website: https://www.foreia.com.br/ **  Additional Readings: Baines, S.G. Globalization and the Impacts of Large-Scale Development Projects on Indigenous Peoples of the Brazilian Amazon. Latinam-Zine.  Kanai, J. M. (2014). On the peripheries of planetary urbanization: globalizing Manaus and its expanding impact. Environment and Planning: Society and Space, 32 (6), 1071-1087.    Module 4: Salvador: Afro-Brazilian Histories and Contemporary Experiences of Race, Gender, Religion and Spirituality, October 29- November 4  Required readings: Keisha-Khan, Y. P. (2004). The roots of black resistance: Race, gender and the struggle for urban land rights in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil. Social Identities, 10(6), 811-831.   Selka, S. (2007). Mediated Authenticity: Tradition, Modernity and Postmodernity in Brazilian Candomblee. Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions, 11 (1), 5-30.   Williamson, K. (2015). Some things cannot be separated: intersectionality in the lives of black women activists in Salvador, Brazil. African and Black Diaspora: An International Journal, 8(1), 86-101.    *Please be aware that lectures and activities may vary to take advantage of any emerging events, to accommodate changes in our lecturers’ availability, and to respect any changes that would affect student safety. Students will be notified if this occurs.    Evaluation and Grading Criteria   - 143 -   Participation:  Participation refers to attendance, punctuality, attentive listening, and active participation in all classes, discussions, excursions, and other activities. It also means appropriate and respectful behavior. The level, frequency, and quality of students’ participation will be monitored and taken into account.  Class Participation.  Participation will be graded in this class. Students are expected to attend all classes, read the required texts, engage with the assigned readings, and participate in class discussions. This is a small class, centred on lectures and group discussions. The accomplishment of the group relies on everyone doing the week’s readings. This means carefully reading the required texts, taking notes on the readings, and developing questions and comments for class discussion. You will be marked most significantly on the quality of your contribution in class. You must make it evident that you have done the assigned readings, thought critically about them, and have come prepared to discuss them. "Participation" may be defined through the enabling of other students and through attentive listening and preparedness to discuss the readings. Speaking in class is encouraged, but dominance or intimidation is not considered participatory. This class challenges systems of domination. Please be attentive to racism, homophobia, transphobia, classism, ableism, and sexism within group dynamics, assumptions, speaking, and when doing assignments/papers.  The class participation grade will be divided into attendance, active participation.   Brief Description of Assignments  -for each of the readings; create a written form of what you are expecting, then go through the exercise listed in the mapping tool (provided separately), then at the end of each week a mini self reflecriton on reflexivity, social change.  Photo essay and presentation: (20 points). A photo-essay is an in-depth look at a particular topic or area of interest, extensively documented with photographs (complementary drawings may be used). It includes research into the facts of the subject and an analysis of those facts to understand the dynamics of the given situation, and possibly the underlying reasons for observed conditions. In this case, include text and target an audience of different stakeholders. You will conduct an in-depth examination of the work and methods of two community-based projects that seek to advance social justice objectives. Be prepared to explain the in detail the social justice issue(s) addressed by the project and how this intervention is perceived by project workers, participants and representatives of the larger society. Use multifocal critical perspectives (such as lay citizen, private business in the selected community, -, environmental activist, and public official from the municipal, metropolitan, or state administration) in order to present, analyze and debate what you have learned, with special sensitivity towards conflicts and negotiation.   Synthetic Essay: Human Sustainability (30 Points). This assignment is an opportunity to critique the paradigm of sustainable development based in experience of real places. The task is to independently think through the concept of sustainability and assess whether the framework of human sustainability defined through readings and in class, and implemented (or not) in the places we visit, is adequate to create “sustainable” human relationships.   Group Assignment: Social Activism Project (40 points):  For this project, students will work in pairs to identify an NGO, social movement or community based project working on a human rights issue affecting a community in Fortaleza. Together with staff members of this project students will explore the character and nature of the human rights violation, the impact of this violation on the human develop of the people of this community and the socially innovative technologies developed by the organization to address the violation and evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention. There should be an identification of one area in which the intervention is not demonstrating the expected results. Students, together with staff members of the project, NGO or social movement and impacted participants, will work to develop a plan of action to address that issue. To think of a viable project, you should draw on the myriad of possibilities for  - 144 -  intervention based on the program's guest lectures, site visits, exchanges, and independent explorations. Each group will then work together to do the following: • Research the issue. • Interview at least two activist working on this issue to find out some of what is being done. • Develop a plan or strategy for future action that promises to have an impact on the issue. • Write a report that details the previous three items. • Deliver a (15-20 minute) presentation to Salvador program students on the work you've done and the strategy you've planned. • Submit a 1-2 page review/evaluation of your group.   Assessment      Photo essay and presentation   20% Synthetic Essay: Human Sustainability           30%  Group Assignment: Social Activism Project 40% Participation     10%    Grading Scale  94-100%   A   90-93%  A- 87-89%  B+ 84-86%  B  80-83%  B- 77-79%  C+ 74-76%  C  70-73%  C- 67-69%  D+ 64-66%  D  Below 64 F    Expectations and Policies   - Show up prepared. Be on time, have your readings completed and points in mind for discussion or clarification. Complying with these elements raises the level of class discussion for everyone. - Have assignments completed on schedule, printed, and done accordingly to the specified requirements. This will help ensure that your assignments are returned in a timely manner. - Ask questions in class. Engage the lecturer. These are often very busy professionals who are doing us an honor by coming to speak.  - Comply with academic integrity policies (no plagiarism or cheating, nothing unethical).  - Respect differences of opinion (classmates’, lecturers, local constituents engaged with on the visits). You are not expected to agree with everything you hear, but you are expected to listen across difference and consider other perspectives with respect.   Please refer to the SIT Study Abroad Student Handbook for policies on academic integrity, ethics, warning and probation, diversity and disability, sexual harassment and the academic appeals process.   Disability Services: Students with disabilities are encouraged to contact Disability Services at disabilityservices@sit.edu for information and support in facilitating an accessible educational experience. Additional information regarding SIT Disability Services, including a link to the online request form, can be found on the Disability Services website at http://studyabroad.sit.edu/disabilityservices.     - 145 -  Appendix F: Table to show Traditional, Critical and Post-critical approaches to north-south mobility experiences   TRADITIONAL CRITICAL POST-CRITICAL ANTICIPATED AND/OR DESIRED OUTCOMES Gain intercultural experience; develop new skills, increased confidence, empathy and awareness about the world; learn about a community different from their own Changes in participants’ perspectives and individual change; student development of various skills and qualities with the hope of implementing social change Concerned with establishing ethical relationships through participants’ practices of humility, openness, engagement with complicity and assumptions. Outcomes are not pre-determined and are unpredictable, uncertain and changing. MOTIVATIONS To act is better than not to act; those who can help should in the way they see fit. As long as the hungry person is fed, the work is worth doing; to delve deeper into power inequities and complicities is unnecessary as the act of service is inherently good. Feels good to make a difference in a community. Commitment to social justice to avoid reproducing unjust structures. Attempts to foster a critical consciousness, examines historical precedents of the social problems addressed in their service learning experiences and the impact of their actions of inaction in maintaining and changing those problems. Attend to the inequities of service learning and improve the way in which problems are approached. To explore how participants’ knowledge about themselves, others, the world and their relations in it are not neutral, universal, unlimited or innocent/benevolent. To open participants to new ways of experiencing, seeing, and relating to the world. Invite participants to examine their desires, investments, assumptions in participating in service learning. Avoids a projection of rightness and dismantles the notion of innocent agency or the ‘right way to fix’ the problems of this world. Moving from wanting to make a difference to questioning one’s sense of self, complicity and role in systemic harm.  POWER Obscures/ignores power differentials inherent in service learning programmes. Student is the server, community is the recipient of help. Brings issues of power to light; questions the need for ‘service’ in the first place; draws on critical theory. Participants encouraged to consider imbalances in the service learning relationships: whose voices are (un)heard, who makes the decisions as to what action should be taken, who ultimately benefits from the experience? Participants are seen as agents of social change, Participants question the power of their assumptions and knowledges in constructing what they consider normal, what it means to ‘be good’, to ‘do good work’, and what they were comfortable with that they can no longer feel comfortable with. Questioning the power of dominant ways of knowing and ways of being.  - 146 -  encouraged to use the service learning experience to reflect on and respond to inequities they observe during their experience TRANSFORMATION IS… Professional development: Individual competencies, skills, experiences; automatic as a part of service learning Political: Individual qualities and mindsets to foster social change; A linear development from notions of charity to pursuing social change; assumption of perspective transformation (change in worldview) Existential: A (re) awakening of visceral connections and interdependencies Not simply acquiring new information or knowledge about hegemonic patterns, but a way of feeling/being in relation to others in different ways that allow people to move out of their needs for comfort, superiority, and certainty. Transformations are not necessarily positive but can be disrupting, troubling, disturbing. Change in worldview (way of knowing) is necessary but not sufficient for meaningful and sustained transformation, requires a change in ways of being. This transformation addresses the costs of not considering other ways of knowing, being, and relating, and to instill in the participant a need to try something different.  SERVICE TO… Service to an individual Service to an ideal (e.g. social justice) Service to relationships between self and other and relationship to knowledge. POTENTIAL RISKS Potential to create uncritical, ahistorical, universalizing relationships. Doesn’t examine individuals’ desires/intentions/motivations for participating. Doesn’t examine learners’ positions and self understanding in the role of the helper. Unintentionally advance a neoliberal, Eurocentric agenda- the server, in the relationship, is still acting on behalf of the served. Normative ideas about justice/equity can reinforce binaries. The desire for changing injustice for and with others has been predetermined and scripted thus foreclosing possibilities for new and different meanings of transformation. Time requirements/constraints, uncomfortable learning. Not all participants are ready and willing to embark on transformations in ways of knowing and ways of being. RELATION TO KNOWLEDGE Epistemic certainty Acknowledgement of epistemic dominance from within epistemic certainty Epistemic openness  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.24.1-0363916/manifest

Comment

Related Items