Positionality

Positionality refers to how one’s position within the systems of power and oppression in society shape the ways in which they walk through the world, recognizing that their social position determines access in society. Misawa (2010, p. 26) notes that “all parts of our identities are shaped by socially constructed positions and memberships to which we belong” and which are “embedded in our society as a system.”

In recognizing positionality, we are forced to confront the realization that the world we live in is nuanced. We will not always understand the experiences of others because we have never faced anything similar because of our identity. For example, some of us love the snow, it can be seen as a symbol of the holidays, a sign that Christmas is coming; but for wheelchair users, the snow can be a symbol of stress because they become more dependent on the municipality and private home/business owners clearing the sidewalk to enable their deplacement. 

Positionality prevents us from making blanket statements such as “Winter is great!” and instead encourage us to add the context from which we speak: “As an able-bodied man, I enjoy winter because…” This enables the speaker to recognize that they are not stating a universal truth, and provides space for the listener to offer up their perspective of the world through their positionality. This is especially helpful when having sensitive discussions surrounding racially charged topics such as the police or child services.

The Triplicity of Space

Worldview is the lens through which we see the world; our ideas, attitudes, knowledge, opinions and identities influence our worldview. This lens impacts how we make decisions, complete our work, assign responsibility and navigate relationships yet many of us rarely pause to examine and reflect on our worldview.

We can understand worldview as a mental model of reality. It contains a comprehensive framework of ideas and attitudes about the world, ourselves. Our worldview is shaped by our inherited characteristics (identity), lived experience, values, attitudes, habits and more. These elements of ourselves vary from one person to another. Therefore, even though some parts of a worldview are shared by many people in a community, other parts differ for individuals, so worldviews are both shared and unique. We will be exploring the notion of worldview through a framework called The Triplicity of Space. 

The Triplicity of Space is a theory on the way in which spaces and places are produced through an amalgamation of the physical properties of a location and the identity markers of the individual human in said space/place. To begin to understand this theory, we have to start with some basic definitions:

Space has no value added. According to Tuan, space has no meaning described to it. It is more or less abstract and does not invite or encourage people to fill it with humanity. John D. Lyons takes this description a step further and explains that space is a supposed physical world, purely conceptual, independent of experience but not excluding it. 

The size of this location does not matter and is unlimited. It can be a city, a neighbourhood, a region or even a classroom. Place is essentially space that is filled with meanings and objectives by human experiences that have been accorded to this particular space. Places are centers where people live life. According to Tuan, a place does not exist of observable boundaries and is independent of a visible expression of a specific time period. According to John D. Lyons, a place refers to the metaphorical organization of everything which is non-physical.

With these definitions in mind, we look to 1974, when renowned French geographer Henri Lefebvre published what has become his most famous work, La Production de l’Espace. In this work, he theorizes that every physical place is imbued with feeling, emotion and meaning, transforming it into a space that has/does not have value. This transformation is reflected on the basis that every space is composed of three dimensions (hence, the Triplicity of Space): 

• l’espace perçu (the physical components of a space): l’espace perçu highlights what we are able to detect through our five senses: sight (eyes), taste (tongue), touch (skin), sound (ears), smell (nose). 

• l’espace conçu (the sociocultural components of space): l’espace conçu is created through the societal power structures as defined by the mainstream cultures, and one's positionality within these structures.

• l’espace vécu (the symbolic meanings of a space to an individual): l’espace vécu materializes from one’s lived experiences, one’s senses, one’s identities and one’s use of language. Amongst the three dimensions, l’espace vécu is the most individual, the most dynamic and the most sensitive to change.

Please note that each dimension (espace) is labelled in French so that the meaning is not distorted through translation. Through this theory, Lefebvre stipulates that all the spatial realities are equally real, true and valid. To put this to an example, let us use a Chemistry Classroom:

• Person A: Person A is a 10th generation Canadian who grew up in a household with two educated parents who were able to dedicate time to helping them with their homework using positive reinforcement. Person A looks forward to, and enjoys chemistry class. They have a pretty good grasp of the subject matter and their teacher constantly shares examples and discoveries of chemists that look like them. To Person A, chemistry class is a wonderful place where they get to sit with their friends and enjoy a subject that holds some meaning. 

• Person B: Person B is a second generation Canadian who grew up in a household where their parents did not go through the Canadian schooling system and do not speak English or French, so Person B does not receive a lot of help with their homework. Person B does not enjoy Chemistry Class. They have an OK grasp of the subject, but they do not connect with the content, and they find the teacher ineffective. They do not see themselves as a chemist, the idea has never even crossed their mind. To Person B, chemistry class is a stressful place where they have to put in twice the effort for half the reward. 

Person A and Person B go to the same school and attend the same chemistry class, the same space, but in reality, two different places. Both equally valid.

• Espace perçu: Person A and Person B share the same espace perçu. They have access to the same instruments in class, they listen to the same teacher speak, they look at the same four walls.

• Espace conçu: Person A and Person B have different espaces conçus. Person A is able to see themselves in the material and hear about chemists that look like them. Their background enables them to engage academically with little difficulty, and the history their family has in the region means they hold deep community ties which make friendships easier. Person B, on the other hand, is disconnected from the material because of their background, making it more abstract and less relevant. Their lack of community ties increases the pressure they feel to succeed, knowing that they have no fallback. 

• Espace vécu: Person A and Person B have different espaces vécus which stem from their different lived experiences, career interests, study habits, socioeconomic status, academic ability, etc. All of these come together to determine the meaning that chemistry class holds for them, and thus how they feel in that space. 

The triplicity of space provides us with a tool to engage in conversations by enabling us to recognizes which dimensions we share with people, and which are different. Through this recognition, we are then able to modify the problematic dimensions to ensure that everyone feels supported in the space. Using our example of chemistry class, the teacher, in recognizing that Person B is struggling with the class because of their espace conçu, could educate themselves on the importance of representation in educational spaces, and follow suit by incorporating the successes of scientists that look like Person B. This teacher could take things a step further and offer to pair up Person B with a student who is doing very well in the class to help them with their homework.