Who students see in curriculum—whose histories are taught, whose literatures are read, whose perspectives are presented—shapes their understanding of whose knowledge matters. Who students see among staff—teachers, administrators, support workers—shapes their sense of who belongs in positions of authority and expertise. Representation in curriculum and staff affects not just abstract equity but students' daily experience of school as place where they do or don't belong.
Curriculum Representation
Traditional curriculum centres certain perspectives. European history, English and French literature, Western science—these have dominated Canadian curriculum. Other histories, literatures, and knowledge systems appear marginally if at all. This centering reflects colonial origins of Canadian education; curriculum was designed by and for settlers within Euro-Canadian frameworks.
Students from underrepresented backgrounds don't see themselves in curriculum. Indigenous students learn more about European history than their own peoples' histories. Racialized students read literature primarily by white authors. Students whose backgrounds differ from dominant norms learn that their perspectives aren't considered knowledge worth teaching. This absence communicates that they don't fully belong.
Curriculum revision has increased representation but unevenly. Provinces have added Indigenous content, diverse authors, and broader perspectives. However, additions may be superficial—isolated units rather than integrated presence. What's been added varies by province and subject; comprehensive representation remains incomplete.
Representation involves more than presence. How groups are represented matters as much as whether they're included. Representation that stereotypes, victimizes, or exoticizes may be worse than absence. Authentic representation includes full humanity—achievements and challenges, diversity within groups, contemporary as well as historical perspectives.
Staff Representation
Teaching remains a predominantly white profession. While student populations have diversified, teaching staff haven't kept pace. Many students never have a teacher from their own background throughout their education. This gap particularly affects racialized and Indigenous students who rarely see themselves reflected in teaching staff.
Leadership positions are even less diverse. Principals, superintendents, and board administrators are even less representative than teachers. Students see diverse people in subordinate roles but rarely in authority. This pattern communicates limits on what people from certain backgrounds can achieve.
Representation affects student outcomes. Research suggests that students benefit from teachers who share their backgrounds—through role modeling, cultural understanding, and implicit expectations. Teacher diversity isn't just symbolic; it affects educational experience and achievement.
Hiring barriers limit diversification. Teacher preparation programs have predominantly white enrollment. Hiring practices may embed biases. School cultures may not retain diverse staff. Addressing the representation gap requires attention to multiple stages of the pipeline, not just hiring.
Why Representation Matters
Role modeling shows students what's possible. Seeing people like themselves in valued positions—as teachers, as curriculum subjects, as successful figures—expands students' sense of possibility. Absence of such models contracts it. Representation affects aspiration.
Validation affirms that students belong. When students see their histories taught, their communities respected, and people like them in positions of authority, they receive validation that they belong in educational spaces. Absence of representation communicates opposite messages.
Accuracy demands diverse perspectives. Knowledge is produced from positions; different positions yield different knowledge. Curriculum that excludes perspectives isn't just unfair—it's incomplete. Including diverse perspectives produces more accurate, comprehensive understanding.
Preparation for diverse society requires diverse education. Students will live and work in diverse communities. Education that exposes them only to narrow perspectives doesn't prepare them well. Diverse representation serves all students, not just those from underrepresented groups.
Challenges in Increasing Representation
Curriculum change is slow and contested. Revising curriculum involves political processes, resource constraints, and competing demands. Adding content requires removing or condensing something else. What to include and exclude involves value judgments that different stakeholders answer differently.
Qualified diverse candidates may be scarce. If pipeline programs don't produce diverse graduates, hiring can't produce diverse staff. Addressing representation requires attention to teacher preparation, not just hiring. Short-term representation goals may conflict with pipeline realities.
Tokenism risks accompany representation efforts. Adding one diverse author, hiring one diverse teacher, or creating one diverse program may satisfy appearance of representation without substantive change. Avoiding tokenism requires sustained commitment to deep representation, not isolated additions.
Representation can be stereotyping. Including diverse perspectives in ways that flatten, essentialize, or stereotype those perspectives may reinforce rather than challenge problematic understandings. How representation is done matters as much as whether it occurs.
Moving Forward
Curriculum review through representation lenses can identify gaps. Examining what's included and excluded, how different groups are represented, and whose perspectives are centered reveals patterns that enable improvement.
Diverse hiring requires intentional effort at multiple stages. Recruiting diverse candidates, ensuring fair selection processes, and creating conditions where diverse staff thrive all matter. Representation won't happen without deliberate action.
Community input can inform authentic representation. Communities know how they want to be represented; their input ensures representation serves rather than exploits. Consulting communities—rather than assuming what representation should look like—respects their authority over their own portrayal.
Questions for Consideration
How representative was the curriculum you experienced in school? Whose perspectives were included and excluded?
How diverse was the staff at schools you attended or know? What effects did staff composition have?
What would genuinely representative curriculum and staff look like? How far are current schools from that vision?
What barriers prevent increasing representation? What would address them?
How should representation efforts avoid tokenism while still making progress?