Exploring and Progressing the Concept of Joyful
Teaching in Higher Education
Muhammad Asadullah, University of Regina
James Gacek, University of Regina
Authors’ Note
Muhammad
Asadullah http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2212-1092
James Gacek http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5424-9934
We
wish to thank Geena Holding, Shaye Seebach, and Halle Procyk for their research
assistance in our project, ‘Decolonizing Praxis in Academic Settings – An
Exploratory Study’. Funding for this research was provided by the University of
Regina President’s Research Seed Grant and the University of Regina Centre for
Teaching & Learning Scholar’s Program. We thank the funders for their
invaluable support. We also thank the reviewers and editors for their
constructive feedback on our manuscript as it evolved into the current
publication.
Correspondence
concerning this article should be addressed to Muhammad Asadullah at Muhammad.Asadullah@uregina.ca.
Abstract
This
paper examines the concept of joyful teaching in higher education and discusses
common themes associated with it, as well as presents challenges. It is this
concept of joyful teaching that we believe should be discussed and explored in
greater detail, especially as it is an emerging concept with decolonizing
pedagogies. This study uses 29 qualitative interviews with university faculty
to examine the following question: How do university faculty define and
practice joyful teaching in higher education? Our paper arises from a study
focusing on decolonizing teaching praxis at a Canadian, prairie university, in
which the focus of ‘joyful teaching’ arose as a major point of discussion. Our
study suggests that restructuring teaching practices around joy can lead to
more supportive, creative, and human-centred classrooms. We believe it is critical
for higher education to place an emphasis on joyful teaching to promote not
only joy but also self-growth for university teachers and students in
post-secondary educational institutions.
Keywords: teaching, joy,
playful, belonging, decolonization
Exploring and Progressing the Concept of Joyful
Teaching in Higher Education
We are in a significant era
of higher education; never have we seen so many different ways of teaching and
learning within and beyond the classroom. One area of pedagogical inquiry that
has risen in recent years is the discussion of joyful teaching. What
do we mean by this? To begin, joyful teaching has numerous definitions, as it
is not the same for every person and subject; it will not always look the same,
considering instructors’ unique teaching styles. Notwithstanding, joyful
teaching is critical in higher education, as it promotes transformational
learning among students (see also Miller & Seller, 1990) by infusing (or
embodying – see below) the ‘joy’ of learning (of change, of shifting
worldviews) and its transformational qualities, broadly conceived, into the
teaching environment. But what does this look like practically? Typically,
higher education promotes standardized teaching, which, in certain
circumstances, includes curricula put forth by the university administration
(Orelus, 2013). Yet, at the same time, our discussion recognizes the ongoing
challenges of standardized teaching, including, in part, that it remains deeply
rooted in colonialism (Orelus, 2013). While efforts to meaningfully decolonize
higher education are important (Henry et al., 2017; Patel, 2016; Patel &
Nath, 2022), we supplement this clarion call by focusing here on how university
instructors move away from standardized teaching while promoting joyful
teaching in their strategic attempts to decolonize their teaching praxis in the
process. We contend that the practice of joyful teaching has the potential to
foster transformational learning, which gives students a newfound appreciation
of the joy of learning while also giving them a new perspective by pushing them
to challenge the strongly held assumptions they have about the world and how it
works.
Our paper arises from a study focusing on
decolonizing teaching praxis at a Canadian, prairie university; the focus of
‘joyful teaching’ arose as a major point of discussion. It is this concept we
believe should be discussed and explored in greater detail. Equally concerning,
we contend, is the lack of consideration joyful teaching has received in
discussions of higher education decolonization efforts. To our knowledge, no
scholarly attempts have been made to specifically examine joyful teaching as it
relates to decolonizing efforts in Canadian higher education. We believe
further attention to this under-researched area is both timely and warranted.
To address this, we explore the concept of joyful teaching at our Canadian,
prairie university. To
further examine joyful teaching, we outline the following sections in our
paper: a literature review, including the definition of joyful teaching and
examples; methods used in our current study; findings, including several themes
that emerged from the said study; and a discussion and analysis on joyful
teaching as it relates to decolonized teaching and standardized teaching. We
conclude with a discussion of limitations and areas for future research.
What
is Joy?
While we alluded to the joy
of learning above, the term ‘joy’ itself must be understood to better
understand joyful teaching. Mag and colleagues (2021) define the concept of joy
as “being with others, sharing (experiences, laughter, tears,
and food)—a generally vibrant feeling of happiness” (p. 2). This feeling of
joy can present itself in schools through the process of joyful teaching.
Poetter (2006) discusses the joy in teaching:
Joy resides in us and comes out as a result
of our interactions with others. It would be inaccurate to say that teaching
merely makes us and/or others joyful. It would be more accurate to say that
teaching is joy, that our predispositions to engage in it are themselves
manifestations of the joy of teaching. (p. 276)
As Poetter (2006) argues, joyful
teaching is inherently within us and emerges through our connections with
others. Yet, it is not entirely correct to say that teaching simply brings joy
to us or those we teach. A more fitting perspective is that teaching itself
embodies joy, and our natural inclination toward it reflects the inherent joy
found in the act of teaching.
Joyful
teaching can be linked to the process of transformational learning. Fetherston
and Kelly (2007) consider transformative learning to include changes where we
view and comprehend the world, knowledge, and ourselves intra- and
inter-reflexively over the course of the learning process. These changes occur
through joyful teaching, where, for example, educators
can be viewed as learning companions with the opportunity to create joyful
learning for their students (Cranton & Wright, 2008, p. 46). Both the educator
and the learner then enrich the experiences of the other, and they quickly
become important to one another.[1]
In
our effort to create a closer connection between joyful teaching and
decolonizing practices, we acknowledge Indigenous authors who might not use the
word joyful, but argue along similar lines of thought.
For example, Robin Wall Kimmerer’s (2025) thoughts on ‘gratitude’ can relate to
our discussion of joy. To begin, Wall Kimmerer (2025) contends that gratitude
is more than thanking someone or being personally thankful:
It is the thread that connects us in a deep
relationship, simultaneously physical and spiritual, as our bodies are fed and
spirits nourished by the sense of belonging, which is the most vital of foods.
Gratitude creates a sense of abundance, the knowing that you have what you
need. In that climate of sufficiency, our hunger for more abates and we take
only what we need, in respect for the generosity of the giver. (n.p., emphasis in original)
Here, we see the creation
of vitality for oneself, but also mutual respect for those who nourish us. The
connection between us and our relations creates a co-situated sense of
belonging between the parties, which establishes the basis of relationships. It
is in this connection that we create not only gratitude, but the response of
reciprocity; in other words, “to give a gift in return” (Wall Kimmerer, 2025, n.p.). Rather than relying upon colonial relations of
ownership and value of property, we contend the gratitude-reciprocity nexus
suggests an alternative form of joy, where a ‘gift economy’ is formed,
understanding wealth not in terms of capital and colonization but in terms of
nourished relations (Wall Kimmerer, 2025). Wall Kimmerer (2025) goes on to
state the following:
To name the world as gift is to feel one’s
membership in the web of reciprocity. It makes you happy—and it makes you
accountable. Conceiving of something as a gift changes your relationship to
it in a profound way, even though the physical makeup of the “thing” has not
changed. A woolly knit hat that you purchase at the store will keep you warm
regardless of its origin, but if it was hand knit by your favorite auntie, then
you are in relationship to that “thing” in a very different way: you are
responsible for it, and your gratitude has motive force in the world. You’re
likely to take much better care of the gift hat than the commodity hat, because
it is knit of relationships. This is the power of gift thinking. (n.p., our emphasis)
This power of ‘gift thinking’ connects well
to our pertinent discussion of joy. To frame the joy of teaching and learning
is to remind ourselves of the gifts that are teaching and learning. To move
beyond colonial methods of teaching and learning, perhaps we need to take cues
from Wall Kimmerer (2025) and reshape the joys of teaching and learning through
‘knits of relationships,’ where what makes you joyful makes you accountable to
spread that joy (material, social, political, etc.) to others so that they may feel
and become nourished through the gift of joy one gives. We will connect
this understanding to our discussion in later sections, but for now, let us
turn to examples of joyful teaching.
Examples of Joyful Teaching
Acker (2003) identifies the
following attributes of teachers who facilitate joyful teaching: emphasizing
both active and participatory learning, displaying enthusiasm for both the
course material and teaching said materials, holding students accountable while
enforcing high academic values, sincerely caring for students and their
learning, and having strong organizational and communication skills when
working with students. In our view, these are important for understanding how
joyful teaching operates. If an educator holds these attributes, they can
better facilitate students’ learning in a safe and open environment that both
values and nourishes critical dialogue. Adamson and Bailie (2012) note that
learning involves emotion as much as cognition (p. 146). Learning is no longer
solely focused on the acquisition and retention of knowledge; rather, it is
also about how knowledge is experienced and remembered. For learning to invoke
emotion, it must occur in a safe, honest, and supportive environment, where the
educator is seen as not the possessor of knowledge, but the facilitator
of knowledge. In this situation, everyone is treated as an equal, and needs are
thus effectively balanced.
Both
experiential learning and critical pedagogy promote joyful teaching, having the
ability to transform institutions and relationships (Breunig, 2005). When
listening to instructors discuss how they created safe and dynamic teaching
spaces, researchers identified five dimensions of instructor authenticity
(Groen & Hyland-Russell, 2010, pp. 231-239):
1.
Self-engagement as a call
2. Valuing
the other – interdependence and seeing student potential
3.
Relationship – creating and sustaining a safe space
4. Context –
opening new vistas for marginalized non-traditional adult learners
5. Critical
reflection
Groen and Hyland-Russell
(2010) also focus on the importance of nurturing relationships between students
and instructors to facilitate joyful teaching. We believe relationships in
higher education should be nurtured, especially as we aim to decolonize the
learning experience for students.
Joyful
Teaching and Decolonization
Joyful teaching aligns deeply with the principles of decolonization, as
it challenges hierarchical and oppressive models of education. By fostering
reciprocal relationships and valuing diverse ways of knowing, joyful teaching
creates spaces for mutual respect and shared learning. It invites educators to
honour the lived experiences and cultural wisdom of students, disrupting
Eurocentric frameworks that often dominate educational systems. In this way,
and as briefly mentioned above, the joy of teaching becomes not only a personal
fulfillment but also a transformative act that seeks to liberate and humanize
both educators and learners (Asadullah, 2021; Smith, 1999).
Importantly, joyful teaching can also resonate profoundly with
Indigenous ways of knowing; there are parallels between the two, including a
greater emphasis on relationality, interconnectedness, and the holistic nature
of learning. Indigenous pedagogies often centre on storytelling, community
engagement, and experiential learning, fostering an environment where joy
arises naturally through shared experiences and collective growth (Cajete,
1994). One can also link joyful teaching to the challenges of colonial,
hierarchical education systems insofar as joyful teaching attempts to subvert
standardized, top-down models of learning and teaching and, instead, embrace equality,
agency, and student empowerment (see, for example, Dei & Asgharzadeh, 2001;
Giroux, 2011; Roofe, 2024), which are key to decolonization efforts. Moreover,
we recognize the extent to which joy can exist as a form of liberation since
acknowledging it is not just an emotionally fulfilling experience, but an act
of liberation and resistance (Roofe, 2024). Following on, and taking into
consideration Wall Kimmerer (2025), we contend joyful teaching can help
‘liberate’ both students and educators themselves from oppressive colonial
structures, making education an act of mutual, liberatory, and nourished
relations of and for growth to take place. In sum, and by embracing these
approaches, educators can create learning spaces that celebrate the richness of
Indigenous knowledge systems, affirm cultural identities, and nurture a sense
of belonging. In doing so, joyful teaching becomes a bridge that connects
diverse perspectives, fostering harmony and respect in educational practices (Michie et al.,
2023).
Current
Study
This paper stems from a
larger study focusing on decolonizing teaching praxis at University of Regina, Canada.[2] The
concept of decolonization has been used in numerous disciplines and settings
such as in psychology (McNamara & Naepi, 2018), governance and public policy (Monchalin, 2016; Stewart, 2018), restorative justice (Asadullah, 2021, 2022,
2024) and education (Grafton & Melançon, 2020; Paris
& Winn, 2014; Tuck & Yang, 2012). The concept has generated a plethora
of definitions. For example, per Monchalin (2016),
decolonization is a goal and process to bring about a fundamental shift away
from colonial structures,
ideologies, and discourses. Both Indigenization and decolonization
remain an overarching priority of the University of Regina. The University’s
policy states that “working with Elders,
Traditional Knowledge Keepers […] is essential to the preservation, restoration
and revitalization of Indigenous traditional ways of knowing; staff, faculty
and others are encouraged to invite, engage with and work alongside Elders, Traditional
Knowledge Keepers, and/or Old Ones” (GOV-040-025).
Joyful
teaching is one of the major themes that emerged from our study on decolonizing
teaching praxis. Through semi-structured qualitative interviews with 29 faculty
members, our research project explores teaching praxis in relation to
decolonization from the perspectives of university faculty members themselves.[3]
The larger study explored the concept of decolonized teaching in post-secondary
education. Prior work suggests the role of Elders, ceremonies and circles are
important elements in helping instructors decolonize their teaching (Gacek
& Asadullah, 2024).
The following section discusses the methods in detail.
Methods
The authors employed
qualitative research methods in this study. Qualitative research, put simply,
has no standard definition; it can be defined in various ways by different
persons or institutions. Yet, we believe Aspers and Corte’s (2019) statement closely
aligns with our views. Per Aspers and Corte (2019), qualitative research is:
An iterative process in which improved understanding to the scientific
community is achieved by making new significant distinctions resulting from
getting closer to the phenomenon studied. Qualitative research, as defined
here, is consequently a combination of two criteria: (i)
how to do things – namely, generating and analyzing empirical material, in an
iterative process in which one gets closer by making distinctions, and (ii) the
outcome –improved understanding novel to the scholarly community. (p. 155)
The key instrument used for
this study was in-depth qualitative interviews. We conducted 29 interviews, and
each interview lasted an average of 90 minutes. The full research project has
been conducted under the guidance and approval of University of Regina’s
Research Ethics Board.
Research Participants
A total of 29 participants from across different
disciplines and demographics participated in this study. At University of
Regina, faculty members comprise tenured and tenure-track, lecturers, and
sessional instructors. This study included research participants
from various disciplines, including social work, engineering, education,
mathematics, justice studies, psychology, and kinesiology. We also made sure to have representation
from all affiliated colleges at University of Regina. Interviews were
structured as face-to-face via Zoom due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Each
participant provided their own response to what makes teaching joyful based on
their own individual experiences and perspectives.
Data
Analysis
Interviews were transcribed and coded based on several
themes that emerged from the study. All participant information was anonymized
and identified by a random number (e.g., Participant #1 is identified as P1,
Participant #10 is P10, etc.). We had more than 20 themes in the initial stages
of coding, which were then sorted into groupings depending on similarities and
distinctions of participants’ experiences. Finally, ten key themes emerged as
the main findings of this study, all of which are discussed below.
Sampling
Both snowball and
purposive sampling methods were used to recruit research participants (see Noy,
2008; Yin, 2011; for limitations, see also Geddes et al., 2018). Our sampling
method allowed us to have diverse participants from different backgrounds and
disciplines.
Findings and Discussion
This study uncovers several
major themes in the concept of joyful teaching. When asked 'what makes teaching joyful,' research participants shared several
salient qualities of joyful teaching. Our 10 key themes and findings are
discussed below.
A
Supportive Classroom Environment
A number of participants
discussed the importance of a supportive classroom environment for joyful
teaching. P22 elaborated that a “sense of belonging in the classroom” is
instrumental for a supportive classroom environment, which can make teaching
joyful. P22 added that “…among the students, that they can see that I am I
belong, I know what I can contribute, and I am here and that's as a teacher,
you should be able to, I try my best to be let my students know that I’m there
for them. They are capable of what their strengths are, can for both
perspectives, that's my, best effort that I tried to put forth”.
It
was made apparent that there must be a sense of belonging fostered in the
classroom; P6 noted that “knowledge and
subjects become meaningless if students do not feel that they belong.”
Furthermore, P22 suggested that teachers should create a safe and welcoming
space for students to come together and discuss ideas. Additionally,
participants such as P3, P4, P5, and P9 reflected on the need for ‘flexibility’
in a supportive classroom environment. The need for spaciousness and
flexibility became more apparent during the COVID-19 pandemic as students
battled illness, technical difficulties, and loneliness (P9). The need for a
motivational and supportive environment goes back to the wise qualities of
teachers. Within this environment, particular attributes such as empathy (P8),
and respect (P24) should be exhibited. In summary, a sense of belonging,
flexibility, empathy, and respect contribute to both joyful teaching and
learning environments.
Creativity
in the Classroom
There is a demonstrated need for creativity in the classroom. Often,
classrooms are seen as joyless and boring environments that are plagued by
routinized learning. The curriculum and teaching style may appear as a “one-size-fits-all”
approach (P4). This has proven to be inefficient when it comes to joyful
teaching, since every student learns differently, and every subject cannot be
taught in the same format (P11). Participants explained the need for teaching
that includes having fun with the content and bringing enjoyment to the
classroom. One participant explained, “[if] you’re enjoying the day and
enjoy the students and tell the students ‘I’m so happy to be spending some time
with you today’ [then] they will be happier” (P24). With this mindset, it
becomes more comfortable to push students from their “zone of proximal
comfort to their zone of proximal development” (P26). This theme of
teaching creatively and paying attention to students’ needs is also shared by
other researchers. For example, Newman (1991) argues learning does not have to
be a dreadful experience. Although teachers do not always have control over the
curriculum, they can change their lesson planning and teaching style. For
instance, small group discussions can make the course content more interesting
and relevant (Newman, 1991, p. 49); however, these discussions can be difficult
to pursue in classrooms with heavy enrollment. Newman (1991) also suggests that
teachers approach examinations differently and create study guides that
increase cognitive work among students. Often, students place more extrinsic
value on their learning rather than intrinsic value.
Playfulness
in the Classroom
In our study, several
participants explained how their students focus on what they can do as well as
what they feel. For instance, P22 shared how students in a genetics class had
to show homologous recombination, which is hard to learn in a textbook and even
on YouTube. To facilitate learning, this teacher had students create homologous
recombination using Play-Doh, which took the students beyond the course
content. Although most students would enjoy using Play-Doh in a university
classroom, one student argued that they were not being taught appropriately
since the teacher was not using lectures, textbooks, and PowerPoints; however,
after getting a nearly-perfect score on the homologous recombination using
Play-Doh, the student recognized that they were, in fact, being taught—they
were just not being taught in a traditional and routinized manner (P22). This
respondent explained how teaching students in this way makes learning fun and
feels like kindergarten again (P22). P26 also shared the concept of playfulness
in their math course. They allowed students to share food and board games to
make their classroom joyful and fun. This theme is also shared by researchers.
For example, Koeners and Francis (2020) argue that
playful learning certainly has its place in higher education:
Playful learning, therefore, challenges the
continued relevance of focusing on a dehumanising and oppressive neoliberal
model of performativity-based learning and sheds light on the potential of a
joyous, authentic transition to the co-creation of knowledge within higher
education. (p. 143)
In
order to create a playful, creative environment that caters to students’ needs,
there must be space for open-minded discussions that have the potential to
cause a cognitive shift in worldviews. P22 explained that there needs to be
more deliberate inquiries about how playful activities can be culturally
responsive education. Morris (2019) argues that faculty should be leaders in
the evaluation of their own course effectiveness, and this should not be up to
the administration to determine. In sum, teachers at the university level can
create joyful classrooms that include fun activities. Joyful teaching can exist
and flourish by teaching creatively and paying attention to students’ needs.
Relationship
Building
Building empathetic,
nurturing relationships with students is one of the hallmarks of joyful
teaching. Most of the research participants mentioned the importance of
building relationships with their students. It is evident from this study that
joyful teaching includes collegial exchanges and mutual respect. According to
P24, “developing relationships with students is [the] key” to
joyful teaching.
Another participant in this study stated that “you can have as much
knowledge as you want, but if you don’t take care of people, it’s all and build
empathetic relationships” (P27). This refers to the idea that teachers and
students should converse with each other. Perhaps, it is small talk before
class begins or a simple question a student asks the professor at the end of
class. By engaging in friendly conversation, a “buzz” is created. This buzz is
described by a participant to be “free engagement” (P27), meaning the
student and teacher may discuss topics not directly related to the course
content, or even school. Bridging the gap between teachers and students can
increase student resilience and build rapport. Additionally, P16 suggested, “…it's
important to develop a rapport with them [students] where they feel respected as
adults, rather than, as you know, like minors or younger students.”
According
to Newman (1991), teachers and students should be learning from each other. In
higher education, it is typical that there is a gap existing between teachers
and students. It is important that both teachers and students view each other
as real people; although they are situated in the same course, they have lives
extending far beyond the physical walls of the classroom. Each person has a
personal life outside of school that involves nurtured hobbies, work, family,
and friendships; often included in this are life challenges (Newman, 1991).
Being
Available
Several participants
suggest being available and present for students is critical to a joyful
learning environment. Students want to feel they can reach out to their
teacher. If students feel that they cannot contact their teacher, they may feel
distanced from the class; this could make learning unenjoyable and dull. Some
participants referred to the importance of students being given the opportunity
to think critically and question their assumptions about how the world works.
During these times, students should be able to contact their teacher to discuss
this and promote personal growth (P13, P14, P29).
Additionally, P14 suggested to be “extra available” for students. P14
explains in detail that “I
feel like the extra availability, if you really want to be an amazing teacher,
is helpful to students, I’ve never had anybody complain that I’m too available
to talk.” In sum, students experience a joyful learning
environment if they have access to their teachers. Students feel at ease when
they see that their teachers are available to answer their questions on a
regular basis.
Practice
Self-Care
Being a teacher or a
student in higher education can feel, at times, stressful and difficult. It is
critical that teachers practice self-care and manage their needs in an effort
to teach joyfully. Participants pointed to the importance of knowing their own
emotions and attitudes and balancing them suitably. It was recognized that if a
teacher is having a bad day and arrives to class in bad spirits, this can
negatively impact students’ ability to learn; the environment will feel tense
and far from joyful. To avoid this, teachers must take care of themselves. A
participant explained the practice of mindfulness, which allows them to
breathe. This is a method that teachers could also pass on to their students in
an effort to help them manage stress (P3). P20 suggested that recognizing,
monitoring, and maintaining their own needs allows them to be creative (P20).
Accordingly, if teachers do not practice self-care or manage their needs, their
ability to teach creatively can be hindered.
P24 explicitly describes the importance of self-care in joyful teaching:
“So important for teaching practice as well, you know, in
us is to practice a lot of self-care… In order to truly be joyful ourselves or
to be as balanced as we can. So, to be happy in our lives as teachers, we need
to practice self-care…it feeds into the classroom practice in a balanced way.” Therefore,
teachers who are grounded in self-care can positively contribute to a joyful
classroom environment.
Qualities
of Wise Teachers
Along with ‘what makes teaching joyful,’ the authors also asked about the
wise and harmful qualities of teachers. As we discuss below, wise qualities
promote joyful teaching, whereas harmful qualities are detrimental to a joyful
classroom environment.
To
begin, participants in this study identified numerous qualities that wise
teachers embody. One participant discussed, in great detail, the idea that
teachers should “curate knowledge, create knowledge, and disseminate
knowledge” (p. 20). According to this participant, teachers should: (i) curate knowledge by storing knowledge in such a way that
it can be sorted and accessed; (ii) create knowledge by researching in order to
derive new understandings and new ways of knowing; and (iii) disseminate
knowledge by applying it to people who want to learn.
Participants
often remarked that teachers should be patient, understanding, and respectful.
For example, participant P19 stated that teachers must not forget that they
were once students themselves, so it is important to be empathetic and identify
with students. To add to these wise qualities, P18 noted that teachers should
be forgiving; in their view, teachers should try to relate to students and
understand where they are coming from in terms of their knowledge, beliefs, and
opinions. Participants also stated teachers should be receptive and good
listeners. For example, P20 noted the importance of two-way communication and
stated that teachers “have two ears and one mouth, so they should be
listening at least twice as much as they are speaking.” Another participant
discussed being readily available and communicative with students by providing
their phone numbers and allowing students to contact them (regarding course
content) during evenings and weekends (P14). Several participants explained
that teachers should be facilitators of knowledge and learning (P4, P14, P11,
P16, P24). In other words, teachers should focus on being a guide “to take
students on a journey of development” (P17). Furthermore, P24 remarked that
teachers “cannot always make students learn, but they can give students
tools to enable their skills to develop.” Additionally, it was stated by
other participants that teachers should be open-minded (P4, P11, P12, P18,
P27). Open-mindedness refers to a teacher’s ability to be willing to consider new
ideas without any individual biases or prejudice. P25 indicated that every
teacher is a human who has their own biases; therefore, the types of
information they choose to teach or emphasize will vary. There was a
significant number of participants mentioning the need for teachers to embody
compassion, empathy, and, overall, a desire to teach. One participant
identified the importance of having fun with the course content, and that
teachers should tell students how happy they are to be in the classroom with
them (P24).
Although
university instructors are often regarded as respective field experts, there is
a good opportunity presented here to not only teach students, but also to learn
from them (Newman, 1991, p. 51). Recall Acker’s (2003) list of attributes
mentioned above; the qualities that the participants listed are parallel to the
attributes Acker (2003) puts forth. According to Sherman (2021), teachers “aim
to be the kind of teacher they wish they had when they were in school” (p. 29).
We contend if teachers foster the qualities of wise teachers, this can create a
more joyful teaching and learning environment.
Harmful
Qualities of Teachers
Participants identified
several harmful qualities that are detrimental to a joyful teaching
environment. Four participants acknowledged the reality that sometimes teachers
have not received enough training in pedagogy or classroom management (P5, P6,
P13, P27). One participant explained that the university can have well-educated
teachers who do not know how to teach concepts at a basic level (P13). This is
a harmful quality that negatively impacts student learning in the classroom. To
echo this remark, P5 believes teachers are not always taught how to manage a
classroom or create a safe space for students. Another participant alluded to
large classroom sizes negatively impacting students since teachers cannot
maintain the capacity to assess students well (P14).
There
was a significant number of participants who described rigidity as a harmful
quality for teaching and learning. For example, participant P20 explained that
some teachers can have a fixed mindset rather than a growth mindset.
Participants also noted closed-mindedness and an unwillingness to learn as
harmful qualities. Specifically, P7, P10, P12, P15, and P20 identified an
unwillingness to learn as a harmful quality. This refers to teachers who are
not willing to adapt to new conditions, to move forward together, to learn new
skills, or to reflect on teaching practices. Participants also regarded the
lack of course knowledge as a harmful quality. P24 described teachers not
wanting to teach or be in the classroom as a harmful quality. There are
numerous reasons why a teacher may not want to teach or be in the classroom;
however, P24 believes teachers may be driven by external factors, such as
money.
It
is evident from the interviews how harmful qualities of teachers include an
unwillingness to learn and adapt. Newman (1991) underscores how “successful
teachers are those who probe into the untested and unknown by challenging not
only the students but themselves” (p. 51). This is especially true when
considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on teachers. In a study by Mag
et al. (2021), a teacher from Romania discusses the impact of the pandemic with
regard to their teaching:
As for me, the pandemic did not affect my teaching behaviour. I
continued to teach with enthusiasm and the same empathetic attitude towards
students. I kept the joy of reunions, even though we had to teach online.
Teaching involves continuous learning. As compensation, during this period, we
had almost constant access to the specialized literature because our university
facilitated our access to international databases. Those who have the joy of
teaching and the constant enthusiasm for learning are never overwhelmed by
temporary crises. (p. 5)
Therefore, the inability of a teacher to be flexible and adaptable is
harmful since it has the potential to negatively impact students’ learning.
Joyful
Teaching is Decolonizing
In this study, most participants stated that honest, upfront
conversations about decolonization must occur in order to create decolonized
teaching. One participant stated the institution needs to support teachers in “developing
a kind of decolonization approach to their pedagogy” (P9); another
participant argued that teachers should take the time to learn more about the
relationship with Indigenous “culture locally, issues, ways of being,
colonization, effects of colonization, the systems and impacts of colonization
within their individual field” (P11). The consensus was to encourage all
faculty members to take an active role in decolonizing course material and to
make decolonization part of the strategic plan. Furthermore, it was stated that
it must start with recognition and acknowledgement, followed by collaborating
with Indigenous Elders and/or knowledge-keepers to discuss teaching methods and
objectives.
Participants
raised a multitude of concerns and challenges with the notion of decolonizing
teaching in higher education. Some participants noted that the university may
not be able to restructure its deeply rooted colonial mindset. Furthermore, to
authentically implement decolonized teaching, the university must go beyond
tokenism. Cooper et al. (2021) define tokenism as symbolic gestures which
“might give the appearance of reconciliation in the classroom, but they are
inauthentic and do little to create transformative change. Instead, they
reinforce or maintain the status quo” (p. 55). Several participants suggested
to us that gestures such as land acknowledgements feel more procedural than
genuinely meaningful (or rather, more symbolic than substantive). For instance,
one participant candidly explained that the Faculty of Arts and Campion College
ask for reports on what is being done for decolonization so that they can turn
it into the government, expressing that this is uncomfortable as it feels like
a “box-ticking exercise” (P1). Moreover, several participants stated that, even
when they did try to decolonize their teaching through the use of Elder
inclusion, they found the payment process to be difficult and funding from the
university to be very minimal. Some instructors at the university feel as
though there are not enough Indigenous Elders available and feel unsure of how
to build relationships with Elders who are around. One participant stated:
I've noticed that there are faculty members
across the university and all different disciplines, who are not Indigenous
themselves but, by nature of the research that they do, are very, very
connected to Indigenous communities and Elders and Indigenous, sort of the
support structure that exists on campus. And I suspect that there are a lot of
other people who don't know how to take a step into that, who might be
uncertain or hesitant about the right cultural practices, or who to approach or
how to approach (P15).
According
to some participants, certain departments in the university do not include any
Indigenous faculty members and have not even started thinking about
decolonization (P2, P3, P5, P6, P11). Furthermore, two participants explicitly
raised the belief that Saskatchewan is a particularly racist province that is
not progressing like other provinces and territories in Canada (P2, P6).
We
believe joyful teaching can help avoid tokenism through efforts to emphasize
authenticity in teaching and learning experiences. Especially when one
considers the deeper, ongoing engagement necessary for true decolonization,
nourishing relationships for students and educators alike also means nourishing
those invited to the classroom setting as well. If we align ourselves with the
gratitude-reciprocity nexus as suggested by Wall Kimmerer (2025), then
authenticity (in teaching and learning, but also decolonization efforts)
becomes the action needed from the joy created and expressed in the classroom
itself. Such action builds momentum to not only discard and outright avoid
tokenism in the classroom but also sets us up for much-needed systemic and
broader institutional change, which we believe is essential to consider.
Indeed, the joy in teaching and learning can drive structural changes,
motivating us to do more with the gratitude we have received (Wall Kimmerer,
2025) and to create more inclusive and decolonized academic environments in the
process.
In
summary, our research participants expressed that University of Regina has the
potential to learn from other institutions around Canada with regard to
decolonizing teaching. If teaching is not decolonized, then joyful teaching
cannot occur. It is clear from participant responses that there is a feeling of
defeat since the university is a powerful institution that is rooted in
colonialism. Rather than being a council of despair, however, we believe joyful
teaching helps us to begin to tackle decolonization challenges. By actively
confronting and reshaping colonial structures in the classroom, and with
gratitude and reciprocity in mind (Wall Kimmerer, 2025), we can begin the
liberating process of relinquishing teaching and learning rooted in
colonialism; it can help educators derive joy through such liberatory (if not
resistant) acts. To create decolonized teaching, the institution itself must be
decolonized. Within this debate, it is critical to recognize that decolonized
teaching typically starts with the impact of colonization, but joyful teaching
does not often start with the impact of colonization.
Standardization
is Harmful to Joyful Teaching
Standardized teaching may contribute to both joyless classrooms and
learning, and standardized teaching can
be a barrier to joyful teaching. As stated by three participants (P22, P23,
P27), in different ways, joyful teaching promotes both transformation and
critical thinking among students. Therefore, it is imperative for the
university administration to explore ways to introduce joyful teaching. According
to Sherman (2021):
The demands of standardization and accountability potentially distract
teachers from cultivating a culture of joy… Perennial expected instructional
patterns can inhibit creativity and diminish inspiration, qualities that
potentially generate joy in teaching and learning. What’s more, strict
accountability measures make it even more difficult to disrupt these patterns
because anxious teachers may be less willing to take instructional risks. In
addition, maintaining routines and ensuring predictability provide a security
blanket for teachers who may not have skills to manage the complexity of
teaching or lack the capacity to make spontaneous decisions that are responsive
in particular contexts to particular students. Put differently, although less
confident teacher candidates may feel joyful because they have control over the
events in their classrooms, the formulaic practices they use are unlikely to
inspire students or generate a joyful learning environment for their students
or, in the long term, for themselves. (p. 23)
Similarly, Noddings
(2014) argues that routinized patterns in standardized teaching do not create
joyful teaching. Some participants felt the university focuses heavily on how
to assess students using standardized assignments and exams to yield conclusive
grades and class averages. An alternative to this could be to assess students
differently. For instance, participants felt students are overly preoccupied
with their marks and not so much with their learning; they measure their
success and worth solely on their grades, which do not always reflect what they
know. Moreover, what students learn may seem irrelevant to them, so even if
they receive a high grade in a particular course, they will often forget the
content as soon as they are removed from the classroom setting. Newman (1991)
makes four suggestions to overcome academic cynicism; one of these suggestions
is to make learning relevant. Teachers, per Newman (1991), should “provide
students with the tools to analyze their lives and the social world they inhabit”
(p. 52).
The other three suggestions Newman
(1991) proposes include changing faculty attitudes towards students, making
learning fun, and removing the competition in learning. To move from
standardized teaching to joyful teaching, the notion of learning needs to be
revisited and re-evaluated. Participants regarded joyful teaching as giving
students the chance to define their own learning. This can be encouraged by the
implementation of smaller class sizes and having students sit in chairs in a
semi-circle. Koeners and Francis (2020) argue that by
“[d]eveloping a ‘Playful University,’ a place of
learning that embraces some form of play, [it] will allow us to promote
progressive failing, building resilience and developing individual and
collective creativity” (p. 154). This suggestion stems from the recognition
that play is a successful teaching practice that is typically only applied in
childhood education, but is still highly relevant for
higher education (Koeners & Francis, 2020). As
the pair go on to state:
The physiology of play delivers evidence that play can promote
intellectual dexterity, individual resilience and adaptability. These important
attributes, amongst many others, could help us to adapt in a challenging world
and curb the apparent epidemic of stress, anxiety and related mood disorders. (Koeners & Francis, 2020, p. 149)
Implications for Teaching Practices
This study presents several
implications for teaching practices. First, this study finds that most
participants are willing to take steps to create joyful classroom environments.
However, participants experience a lack of training in teaching and other
pedagogy skills and resources. Indeed, in our study, participants shared that
there are limited resources and training for them. We suggest that universities
need to offer regularized workshops and training on teaching pedagogies.
Second, we believe the concept of decolonized teaching can complement
the process of joyful teaching. Elsewhere, the authors found that decolonized
teaching can facilitate the idea of joy alongside other feelings, emotions,
mindsets and worldviews in the classroom (Gacek & Asadullah, 2024). Third,
participants have numerous opinions on joyful teaching. It is clear there is no
one-size-fits-all technique for joyful teaching in practice – and perhaps that
is precisely the point.
How
instructors choose to implement joyful teaching is entirely up to them, but
there are some thought-provoking examples of joyful teaching in higher
education which can influence the direction they decide to take. Doing so
carves open potential opportunities for instructors to learn and grow as they
facilitate student learning and growth. Additionally, participants have varying
explanations of what joyful teaching is. Some may choose to focus on the wise
qualities of university teachers, while others seem to emphasize avoiding the harmful
qualities of professors. They may discuss what the overall classroom
environment looks and feels like in terms of creativity, motivation, and
support. Many participants suggest joyful teaching, as beneficial as it can be,
is not always nurtured and supported due to the current standardization of
education. Joy remains an important component in teaching and learning, and therefore must be cultivated and nurtured more
so than standardized methods of teaching and learning.
Conclusion
Times are changing in higher educational teaching and learning; there is
no doubt about it. As Gacek and McClanahan (2021, p. 510) contend, “Socratic
teaching styles and the traditional lecture have been the subject of growing
critique” (see also Jochelson & Ireland, 2019). Teaching and learning
practices are constantly shifting as new generations of students enter higher
education; however, unless students are in the presence of an extremely
charismatic lecturer who can persuasively and poignantly perform, “students
would rather not sit for hours facing forward while the professor waxes
lyrical” (Gacek & McClanahan, 2021, p. 510). Equally important to this
change in pedagogy and student composition is recognizing and engaging in
decolonization efforts within higher education. We believe joyful teaching can
work to progress teaching, learning, and meaningful decolonization on these
fronts.
Our paper presents an opportunity for
instructors and university administration alike to consider joyful teaching in
their respective decolonization efforts. Joyful teaching is about creating a
learning space embodying joy, which consistently consists of happiness,
laughter, and support. At the same time, joyful teaching is not just an outcome
of decolonization; it is an active practice that decolonizes pedagogy itself.
By situating joyful teaching as an act of liberation and resistance to colonial
structures, it carves open necessary space for diverse voices and knowledge
systems to flourish in the classroom. Moreover, joyful teaching becomes a means
of reclaiming educational spaces from dominating, historical, and colonial
ideologies.
To foster this type of learning
environment, higher education should consider transitioning from standardized
teaching to joyful teaching. This transition rightly involves the
decolonization of teaching; while efforts can be made to begin the decolonization
process at an individual level, the change needs to be established by the
institution itself. Some institutions in the higher educational landscape may
believe that standardized teaching is sufficient; we would encourage those
institutions—and the administrators and policymakers therein—to reconsider.
Certainly, a transition towards joyful learning requires time, money,
resources, and the will to do so, but our findings suggest it is necessary to
better equip students with the tools and skills necessary to meaningfully
receive strong and comprehensive learning experiences. Several themes of joyful
teaching emerged from our study.
We contend these themes have relevance
to joyful teaching and should be considered and expanded upon in further
research. Of course, a limitation of this study is the small group of
participants chosen to discuss joyful teaching; this concept is arguably
abstract in some components and is neither easily quantifiable nor
generalizable to the larger Canadian population. Moreover, while this study
yielded ten themes, it is possible that another group of participants would not
have the same or similar thoughts. Nevertheless, future studies that take into
consideration these themes in relation to the experiences of students, faculty,
and administrators are beneficial, and we encourage greater scholarly efforts
in this area of inquiry. This includes explorations of joyful teaching across
diverse contexts, such as different disciplines, institutions, or cultural
settings.
Higher education can make a difference
in students’ learning experiences. Our work suggests the joy of learning can be
embodied and nurtured in higher educational learning environments. Joy helps
bridge connections between instructors and students and can benefit both as
each grows in teaching and learning from one another. Now is the time to
reimagine what embodying and nurturing joy can look like in higher education.
References
Acker, J. R.
(2003). Class acts: Outstanding college teachers and the difference they make. Criminal
Justice Review, 28(2), 215-231. https://doi.org/10.1177/073401680302800202
Adamson, C. W.,
& Bailie, J. W. (2012). Education versus learning: Restorative practices
in higher education. Journal of Transformative Education, 10(3),
139-156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344612463265
Archer-Kuhn,
B., Samson, P., Damianakis, T., Barrett, B., Matin,
S., & Ahern, C. (2021). Transformative learning in field education:
Students bridging the theory/practice gap. British Journal of Social Work,
51, 2419-2438. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa082
Asadullah, M. (2021). Decolonization and RJ: a proposed
theoretical framework. Decolonization of
Criminology and Justice, 3(1),
27-62. https://doi.org/10.24135/dcj.v3i1.25.
Asadullah, M. (2022). Exploring the genesis and praxis of
restorative justice in Nova Scotia, Canada. Journal of Community Safety and
Well-Being, 7(4), 156-163. https://doi.org/10.35502/jcswb.243
Aspers, P.,
& Corte, U. (2019). What is qualitative in qualitative research. Qualitative
Sociology, 42(2), 139-160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-019-9413-7
Battiste, M., Bell, L., & Findlay, L. M. (2002).
Decolonizing education in Canadian universities: An interdisciplinary,
international, indigenous research project. Canadian Journal of Native
Education, 26(2), 82-95.
Breunig, M.
(2005). Turning experiential education and critical pedagogy theory into
praxis. Journal of Experiential Education, 28(2), 106-122. https://doi.org/10.1177/105382590502800205
Cajete, G. A.
(1994). Look to the Mountain: An Ecology of Indigenous Education. Durango, CO: Kivaki Press.
Cooper, E.,
Major, R., & Grafton, E. K. (2021). Beyond tokenism: Relational learning
and reconciliation within post-secondary classrooms and institutions. The
Canadian Journal of Native Education, 40(1), 54-73. https://doi.org/10.14288/cjne.v40i1.196602
Cranton, P.,
& Wright, B. (2008). The transformative educator as learning
companion. Journal of Transformative Education, 6(1), 33-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344608316961
Dei, G., &
Asgharzadeh, A. (2001). The power of social theory: The anti-colonial discursive
framework. The Journal of Educational Thought (JET) / Revue de la Pensée Éducative, 35(3), 297-323.
DiCicco-Bloom,
B., & Crabtree, B. F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education,
40(4), 314-321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x
Fetherston,
B., & Kelly, R. (2007). Conflict resolution and transformative pedagogy.
A grounded theory research project on learning in higher education. Journal
of Transformative Education, 5(3), 262-285. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344607308899
Flick, U.
(2007). Designing qualitative research. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208826.n1
Gacek, J.,
& Asadullah, A. (2024). Exploring the concept of ‘decolonized teaching’ in higher
education: Experiences from a Canadian university case study. Journal of Critical Race, Indigeneity, and
Decolonization, 1(1), 24-39.
Gacek, J.,
& McClanahan, B. (2021). Learning about the illegal and the ‘lawful but awful’: progressing public criminology in the university classroom. Journal
of Criminal Justice Education, 32(4), 495-512.
Geddes, A., Parker, C., & Scott, S. (2018). When the snowball fails
to roll and the use of ‘horizontal’ networking in qualitative social research. International
Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(3), 347-358.
Gilly, S. M.
(2004). Experiencing transformative education in the “corridors” of a
nontraditional doctoral program. Journal of Transformative Education, 2(3),
231-241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344604265273
Grafton, E., & Melançon,
J. (2020). The dynamics of
decolonization & indigenization in an era of academic “reconciliation”. In
S. Cote-Meek & T. Moeke-Pickering (Eds.), Decolonizing
& Indigenizing Education in Canada (pp. 135-153). Canadian Scholars.
Greek, C. (1995). Using active
teaching strategies in teaching criminology: A personal account. Journal of
Criminal Justice Education, 6, 153-164.
Groen, J.,
& Hyland-Russell, T. (2010). Humanities professors on the margins: Creating
the possibility for transformative learning. Journal of Transformative
Education, 8(4), 223-245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344611423401
Henry, F., Enakshi, D., Kobayashi, A., James, C., Li, P.,
Ramos, H., & Smith, M. S. (2017). Race, racialization and indigeneity in
Canadian universities. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 20(3), 300-314.
Jochelson, R., & Ireland, D. (2019). Law students’ responses to innovation: A study of
perspectives in respect of digital knowledge transmission, flipped classrooms,
video capsules and other means of classroom dissemination. Manitoba Law
Journal, 41(1), 131-160.
Koeners, M. P., &
Francis, J. (2020). The physiology of play: Potential relevance for higher
education. International Journal of Play, 9(1), 143-159. https://doi.org/10.1080/21594937.2020.1720128
Lokot, M. (2021).
Whose voices? Whose knowledge? A feminist analysis of the value of
key informant interviews. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
20, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920948775
Mag, A.G.,
Sinfield, S., Burns, T., & Abegglen, S. (2021). The joy of teaching and
learning in academia – teachers’ perspectives from three countries. MATEC
Web of Conferences, 343, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/202134311007
Mamat, N. H.,
& Ismail, N. A. H. (2021). Integration of emotional intelligence in
teaching practice among university teachers in higher education. Malaysian
Journal of Learning & Instruction, 18(2), 69-102. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2021.18.2.3
Mbembe, A. J. (2016). Decolonizing the university: New
directions. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 15(1),
29-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022215618513
McNamara, R., & Naepi,
S. (2018). Decolonizing community psychology by supporting Indigenous
knowledge, projects, and students: Lessons from Aotearoa New Zealand and Canada. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 62(3-4), 340-349.
Mezirow, J.
(1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for
Adult and Continuing Education, (74), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.7401
Michie, M., Hogue, M., &
Rioux, J. (2023). Two-Ways thinking and Two-Eyed
Seeing as ways of implementing Indigenous perspectives in the science education
curriculum. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research,
5(1), 23-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-023-00084-3
Miller, J. P., & Seller, W. (1990). Curriculum:
Perspectives and Practice. Copp Clark Pitman.
Monchalin, L. (2016). The colonial problem: An indigenous perspective on crime and injustice
in Canada. University of Toronto Press.
Morris, L. V.
(2019). Faculty role in reforming teaching and course evaluations. Innovative
Higher Education, 44(6), 419-421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-019-09486-6
Newman, D. M.
(1991). Overcoming academic cynicism: Some suggestions for a joyful teaching experience.
Teaching Sociology, 19(1), 48-53. https://doi.org/10.2307/1317573
Noddings,
N. (2014). High morale in a good cause. Educational Leadership, 71(5),
14-18.
Nohl, A. M.
(2015). Typical phases of transformative learning: A practice-based model. Adult Education
Quarterly, 65(1), 35-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713614558582
Noy, C.
(2008). Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative
research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4),
157-178.
Omid, A., Haghani, F., Adibi, P. (2016). Clinical teaching with emotional intelligence: A teaching toolbox. Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 21(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.4103/1735-1995.181983
Orelus, P. (2013). Decolonizing schools and our mentality:
Narratives for pedagogical possibilities from a former high school teacher and
colonized subject. Excellence in Education Journal, 2(1), 4-22.
Paris, D., & Winn, M. (2014). Humanizing research:
Decolonizing qualitative inquiry with youth and communities. SAGE Publishing.
Patel, L. (2016). Decolonizing education research:
From ownership to answerability. Routledge.
Patel, L., & Nath, N. (2022). “What can ‘settler
of colour’ teach us?” In A. Gebhard, S. McLean, & V. St. Davis (Eds.). White
Benevolence: Racism and colonial violence in the helping professions. (pp.
148-162). Fernwood Publishing.
Pathak, V., Bijayini, J., Sanjay, K. (2013). Qualitative research. Perspectives
in Clinical Research, 4(3), 192. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-3485.115389
Poetter, T.S.
(2006). Recognizing joy in teaching. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 8(1/2),
269-287.
Robinson, M. (2000). Using active
learning in criminal justice: Twenty-five examples. Journal of Criminal
Justice Education, 11, 65-78.
Roofe, C. (2024). Teachers
creating anti-colonial futures: Exploring curriculum conversations with
teachers through autobiographical reflection. Power and Education, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/17577438241246095
Sherman, S.
(2021). Nurturing joyful teaching in an era of standardization and
commodification. The Educational Forum, 85(1), 20-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2020.1772425
Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research
and Indigenous peoples. Zed Books.
Stewart, M. (2018). Racialized policing: Settler colonialism
and justice. In M. Hurlbert (Ed.), Pursuing
justice: An introduction to justice studies (pp. 180-198). Fernwood Publishing.
Tuck, E., & Yang, W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization:
Indigeneity, education & society, 1(1), 1-41.
Wall Kimmerer, R. (2025). “Gratitude is more than thank you.” Awaken.Org.
Available at https://www.awakin.org/v2/read/view.php?tid=2719
Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative research from start to finish.
Guilford Press.
[1] We recognize that joyful teaching
can occur and lead to transformational learning, the latter of which is a topic
that has been discussed at length by a range of scholars (Abramsom, 2016;
Archer-Kuhn et al., 2021; Gilly, 2004; Merzirow, 1997; Nohl, 2015, among
others). Due to page space and brevity, we limit our conversation to the former;
while remaining mindful of the impact the latter can have upon instructors and
students in higher education.
[2] We respectfully acknowledge that we
work and live on traditional territories of Indigenous peoples on Turtle
Island. It is a place where the spirit of treaties signed between Indigenous
peoples and settler colonial governments is not honoured; thus, we are
committed to conversations and relationships in solidarity with Indigenous
peoples for change, justice, and reconciliation. We offer our gratitude to
Indigenous peoples for their care for, and teachings about, our earth and our
relations. May we honour those teachings.
[3] The ability to explore and digest
decolonization efforts in higher education is but one aspect of many similar
discussions, all of which merits further study. Our ongoing work endeavours to
explore how current decolonizing teaching praxis is implemented at and across
Canadian university settings; this includes the benefits, challenges, and
improvements for implementing decolonizing teaching praxis. Our research
continues to supplement clarion calls by those who question whether
decolonization will ever be attainable in academia (Battiste et al., 2002;
Mbembe, 2016). While this question is beyond the scope of our paper, we
continue to pose this question in our research, to ourselves, and our
overlapping academic, and community circles. We encourage others to do the
same.