Abstract

As a college instructor who has previously researched, developed, and implemented Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE) curricula for my literature classes, I have identified several benefits, risks, and needs associated with teaching PVE in higher education. In this dissertation, I use critical autoethnography to elucidate my experience as a PVE researcher-practitioner from 2013 to 2016 at a CEGEP in the province of Quebec in Canada. I have done do so to improve my own practice as an instructor, to shed light on issues that may present barriers to effective PVE instruction, and to work toward socially just education. Autoethnography has been a useful method for understanding my experience as a PVE researcher-practitioner. It offers valuable insights into how the PVE-centered course I designed and taught both aligned with and diverged from recommendations in the literature. I found the experience to be paradoxically hopeful and despairing. On the one hand, the benefits of teaching PVE are promising, as they include fostering civic engagement and serving as a protective factor against radicalization. On the other hand, my research points to a number of potential drawbacks that, in my case, appeared to outweigh these benefits. These drawbacks include the potential risks that PVE poses to the students I teach and the negative experience I encountered while simultaneously researching PVE, designing timely and carefully designed PVE curricula, dealing with the emotionally charged content, and teaching those curricula. This resulted in a demanding workload, a heavy emotional and psychological toll, and a decline in my health and morale. These experiences prompted me to rethink and ultimately reconceptualize teaching my stand-alone PVE-centric course in favour of courses that focus primarily on teaching critical reading and critical thinking skills, since critical thinking can be beneficial in PVE and can bolster civic engagement—skills necessary for preventing violence in all forms. Additionally, I have found that balancing content that presents narratives of oppression with content that presents positive counter-narratives to be helpful in building resilience and instilling hope, motivation, and improved well-being.