Running head: FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME

From Group C to Group Me: Moving Beyond the Labels of Education and into Student

Development

Patrick Rezek

Loyola University Chicago

2
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
Introduction

I like to think of myself as being well-versed in the study of education. For most of

my early educational experience, I spent a great deal of time focusing on how teachers

taught- what types of visual learning methods were used, were there any hands-on

activities in the classroom and how all of the students were presented in the classroom

space. I was fascinated with the ideas behind why we learned certain subjects and

talked about specific dates in history more than others and how everything was

connected by a common theme(s). I was more so focused on the larger picture of a

novel than minute details we were required to memorize for an in-class quiz or exam. I

refuted pure memorization in the classroom as I constantly asked why questions. If you

were to ask me to connect the struggle for identity and self-definition in The House on

Mango Street, I could write a novel, but ask me to list the elements on the periodic table

and I would freeze.

The educational system I was put through early on operated through what bell

hooks deems the banking system and this proved to be a challenge in my learning

development. This approach to learning slowly lead me to perceive myself as a member

of Group C, a label that was placed next to my name in the 4th grade by my math

teacher. This form of identification would soon lead to my persistent focus and

development of self-authorship, as presented through the theories and practices of

Baxter-Magolda, and then become the motives to my pursuit of education and career in

teaching. In this reflection piece, I call attention to several moments during my collegiate

and post-collegiate experience that I found to be pertinent to my development as a

person and an educator. I discuss the process of challenging the system of education
3
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
as both a student and an educator, and through this process, discovering the

application of student development theory in real practice.

The Line in the Sand

Being labeled and/or categorized by teachers especially at an early age had a

profound impact on me developmentally and this carried over into the creation of my

foundation as an educator. As Laura Rendon preaches through her Theory of

Validation, “students who were validated develop confidence in teir ability to learn,

experienced enhanced feelings of self-worth and believed they had something to offer

the academic community” (Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido-DiBrito, F., & Quaye, S. J.,

2016, p. 46). This would become a critical practice for me in the classroom as a student

in my undergraduate institution and would later partner with theory in my teaching

career. The affordability and opportunity that I was granted to be able to attend college

was a major milestone in my life. One of the major reasons for my selection of Wabash

College as an undergraduate institution was because of the intellectually diverse

conversations had between students and faculty both in and outside of the classrooms.

As a liberal arts institution, there is a focus to providing students with a holistic style of

learning and doing so through critical thinking. Going back to my earlier story of

teaching and connecting themes to the bigger picture, at Wabash, students were

encouraged to be integrated into their learning experience. Courses were designed

around conversation, lectures were unheard of, and exams were thought-provoking

entities of student assessment. As a student, I was challenged to attend class,

participate and complete my assignments. My classmates became my second teachers-

holding me accountable for my work, challenging my viewpoints, and supporting my

4
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
growth of knowledge. This style of teaching and education best suited me and my

needs of enhancing my knowledge beyond the text of a book.

At Wabash, in order for seniors to graduate, they must participate and

successfully complete both written and oral Comprehensive exams. These exams test

seniors in their understanding of themes, ideas and knowledge from their major and

minor fields. These exams are by far the most daunting experience that I ever had at

Wabash- it challenged you invest in your education. Passing this exam allowed me to

graduate, but it also reaffirmed my self-belief, my intelligence, and my perseverance.

Knowing I wasn’t alone in the process and had the support of my fellow seniors and

professors was motivating. I had high expectations set, but the college had created

resources to ensure my success.

Nevitt Sanford’s Theory of Challenge and Support rings true in both my own

educational experience as a student and as a teacher. Sanford implies, “if the university

environment fails to provide the kind of support this diverse student population needs or

if students do not experience the supports available, then the challenges posed by

coursework, family, peers, work, etc… may be too great” (Sanford, N., 1966). It is

important to find that balance between the challenge you give your students and the

support that is available to them; drawing that line in the sand, knowing that it can be

moveable any which way to best suit needs of balance. My growth as a student in what

I was able to accomplish played a large role in how I structured my own teaching styles

in my high school classrooms in Chicago and Crawfordsville. I worked with students as

a whole class, and individually, to set expectations of achievement that were

manageable (and some very difficult) during the school year. It was then agreed upon
5
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
that we all would hold each other to those expectations of achievement. I spent a great

deal of time planning each class around what each student hoped to achieve by the

year as well as making sure I was challenging them both academically and also as an

engaged citizen in the world they lived in.

Coming Out of The Label

One of the most progressive aspects to my development as both a student and

an educator has been finding my rooted sense of identity over what I see as three

stages of development: collegiate life, immersion abroad, and Chicago. The first stage

of this development came through my time as a student at Wabash College. Attending

an all-male, PWI, in the hub of the Midwest forced a categorization of my identity and

placed limitations of the concept of normalcy. It was only a few short months into the

beginning of my college experience that I began to question my sexual identity. At first, I

fought the urge to even think about what it meant for me to be gay and how that would

position myself with my friends and peers; it honestly terrified me. I didn’t have any

friends that were gay nor did I know many gay people at the time and so this left me to

explore this identity development mostly on my own.

I had taken such an active role in student government and became fairly well

recognized on campus for both my leadership and my bubbly personality. I had not

taken it upon myself to see how my personality and style of fashion were perceived by

others, and I was starting to get asked about my sexual identity by my peers. I denied

everything that was ever asked and even dated a girl to put on a face to fit these

“normalcy standards” that the environment and society had created. I had seen how

members of the LGBT community were portrayed, talked about and treated by my
6
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
classmates and friends; LGBT students were constantly kept out of progressive

conversation. There was a student movement on campus for the creation of an LGBT

center and funding was denied by both student government and administration. Gay

students were constantly denied access to fraternity parties because of the fear they

may take advantage of drunk male students. There were no courses on LGBT studies

offered at the college and so students were left to base their own understandings off of

media and prior interactions. After living these experiences, I chose to confide by

societal standards and to fit the mold that I was placed in.

The second stage of my sexual identity development, and probably my most

impactful stage, came after my collegiate experience when I taught as a Fulbright

Scholar at a university in Wroclaw, Poland. I was charged with creating a curriculum

that would best represent the “diversity of the United States of America”. I took it upon

myself to challenge the educational system and societal standards and created a

course which I titled, “Masculinity as Portrayed Through the American Cowboy”. This

class investigated gender and in particular, masculinity, and how it was constructed by

society through stereotypes in media, literature, and interaction. I had my students read

literature on hyper-masculinity and then contrast that with feminine-masculinity and

discuss how we define masculinity in itself (if it could be done). We progressed through

the notion that masculinity is fluid and ever changing based on cultural and societal

influences and that there cannot be one working definition. Unlike my own previous

educational experience, I structured the course around conversation and dialogue. I

brought lived experiences into the classroom and challenged my students to, like

myself, ask the “why questions”. I wanted to create an environment where students felt
7
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
they could open up and speak freely. Through this teaching, it wasn’t until I completed

this course and academic year that I had fully come to accept my own sexual identity. I

had asked my students to challenge their own views and to accept a holistic approach

through multiple perspectives. This then forced me to internally think about my own

lived experiences and views and challenge the fears that I had.

The third stage has appeared through my lived experiences in Chicago, most

importantly through both my work as a manager at an LGBTQ bar and this master’s

program. Every day I am reinforcing my pride as a gay man and educating myself more

on LGBTQ cultural identities. This master’s program has allowed me to find those

connecting themes between course work and lived experiences through practices and

theories such as Queer Theory. In Student Development in College, the authors

describe queer theory as, “placing an emphasis on identities that have not always been

considered “normal,” queer theory opens awareness for recognition, acceptance, and

affirmation of fluid sexual and gender identities” (Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido-

DiBrito, F., & Quaye, S. J., 2016, p. 33). Connecting this to my course in Poland,

understanding the fluidity is a major component for me; understanding that gender and

sexual identity are not solidified constructs and are constantly evolving. While I am fully

appreciative of the fact that I am receiving this education now, I constantly think about

what it would be like if I had received this coursework in undergrad and if it would have

altered my development. A large part of Queer Theory is the raising awareness of

fluidity in gender and sexual identity and one of the hardships that is faced in higher

education is that, “few institutions have disseminated enough information to adequately

educate members of the academic community about the experiences and needs of gay
8
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
and bisexual students” (Patton, 2011, p. 78). I feel that this was a major factor in my

undergraduate experience as a closeted gay student- there were no resources provided

for LGBT students to explore identity and no means provided to educate other members

of the community.

Progressive development is the direction that should be taken by all students and

educators, particularly in connection to encompassing the needs of all students through

theories such as Queer Theory. As I work today in the Office of Student Diversity and

Inclusion at DePaul College of Law, I constantly am faced with using Queer Theory

amongst many practices when implementing programs and events and communicating

with students. Abes and Kasch define Queer Theory as, “analyzing on the meaning of

identity, focusing on the intersections of identities and resisting oppressive social

constructions” (Abes, E. S., & Kasch, D., 2007, p. 620). Through this definition, I see

and experience this every day when we discuss the use of personal pronouns among

our peers. I had never been introduced to this before coming to Loyola and while it may

seem like a minor contribution, it is major in furthering the conversation around the

intersectionality of identity

Where Do I Fit In

The question of “who am I?” is a developmental journey that has no end; it is a

continual process of growth and learning. Brene Brown’s novel, Braving the Wilderness,

was a powerful piece for me to read as I was able to connect my lived experiences with

what I was reading on paper. Brown discusses the need and value that we find in fitting

in with social groups and amongst our peers. From the moment I was placed in Group 3

in 4th grade, I drove myself to find that sense of belonging; I wanted to be able to stand
9
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
with my friends and not feel alone. Brown writes, “My parents, especially my father,

valued being cool and fitting in above all else. I was not cool. I did not fit in” (Brown,

2017, p. 10). This sense of needing to meet expectations or fulfill a level of satisfaction

to please others was a major component of my college experience. Growing up I was

involved in lots of extracurricular activities- I did all the sports and music lessons

possible. At first, I saw it as a means of just keeping busy; something fun to do. As I got

older, I began to realize it was a way for my parents to feel a level of satisfaction in the

life they had- if their son was captain of the swimming team and a state finalist, then

they could hold a sense of pride in the life they lived and gave to their children. I

continued this mentality into college and my participation in Fraternity Life and Student

Government- I felt that I had to do the most to prove my worth or value to myself and

others.

Nancy Schlossberg’s Theory of Mattering and Marginality is one that from my

experience as a student, I mirrored in my classroom as a teacher. “Schlossberg

described marginality as a sense of not fitting in that can lead to self-consciousness,

irritability, and depression…when individuals feel marginalized, they worry if they matter

to anyone” (Patton, et. all, 2016, p. 36). It is my fundamental belief in teaching that

meeting the individual needs of students in a classroom are vital to their success. In my

classrooms, when students feel that their voice is heard and that they don’t go

unrecognized, there is a direct correlation to their investment in their own education.

With connection to this theory, we can bring in discussions around race and privilege.

Growing up, privilege was common focal point of conversation; it was always

discussed in the concept of how appreciative we should be to the many opportunities

10
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
my parents granted my sister and I – through education at the best schools, spots on

the best sports teams, and a stable source of familial income. In Debby Irving’s book,

Waking up White, she discusses the concept of hard work and accomplishment and the

misconception carried through the correlation of the two- “from a young age I

internalized the idea that accomplishment for anyone was simply a matter of intention

and hard work” (Irving, 2014, p.12). I relate this back to the Theory of Marginality and

Mattering in the sense that as educators, we cannot conflate the two and label students

who do not succeed as failures or tell them it’s because they aren’t working hard. I had

one student in particular in my English course that was probably one of the hardest

workers I had ever seen in a student in class, but he struggled with getting homework

done and therefore was failing. When I brought it up to him, I had found out that he

didn’t have a safe home environment and when he went home every night, there was

either domestic abuse between parents or they weren’t allowed in the neighborhood

due to street violence. I decided to work with this student after school and let him come

to do homework in the classroom; eventually we created a small study group with other

students so he would not feel alone.

Conclusion

If there is something that I can take away from my overall educational experience

thus far, it is that education should be individualized, and attention driven. It is important

to place value on the individual needs of each student in the classroom, organization, or

school. By neglecting to address individual needs, culture, voice, language, etc… you

marginalize that student(s) and you rid them of their full potential of learning. My early

fascination with education and how teachers taught is coming full circle with student
11
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
development theory. Practices and Theories such as Queer Theory, Critical Race

Theory, Theory of Marginality and Mattering, Theory of Validation, and Theory of

Challenge and Support all help create classrooms and environments of access to

multiple perspectives, the use of lived experiences in learning, and the individuality of

the student matters. These theories are not only relevant as an educator but also as

practices for students as well. By focusing on what you provide and bring to the

conversation is just one way to go from Group C to Group Me.

12
FROM GROUP C TO GROUP ME
Works Cited

Abes, E. S., & Kasch, D. (2007). Using queer theory to explore lesbian college students'

multiple dimensions of identity. Journal of College Student Development, 48(6),

619-636. Retrieved March 19, 2019.

Brown, B. (2017). Braving the wilderness: The quest for true belonging and the courage

to stand alone. New York City, NY: Random House.

Irving, D. (2014). Waking up white: And finding myself in the story of race. Cambridge,

MA: Elephant Room Press.

Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido-DiBrito, F., & Quaye, S. J. (2016). Student

development in college: Theory, research, and practice. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Brand.

Patton, L. D. (2011). Perspectives on identity, disclosure, and the campus environment

among African American gay and bisexual men at one historically black

college. Journal of College Student Development, 52(A), 77-100. Retrieved

March 19, 2019.

Sanford, N. (1966). Self and society: Social change and individual development. New

Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.