Context and Culture: What Is Critical Pedagogy?, Research
“Creating and negotiating languages of inclusion and possibility that go beyond critique and demystification allows us to analyze ourselves and society from our multiple locations and to decide how we will define and live our lives.” (7)
In Context and Culture: What Is Critical Pedagogy?, Leistyna and Woodrum thoroughly explain what the idea of Critical pedagogy really is, in an effort to defy and correct the misconceptions and misinterpretations that surround this new methodology. They also explain and emphasize how Critical pedagogy differentiates itself from the conservative (technocratic) education and the supposedly more progressive, popular movement in education at the time, “multicultural education”. According to Leistyna and Woodrum, both the conservative, traditional paradigm and the more progressive, multicultural paradigm fail to create spaces for a more critical and democratic exchange of ideas by “failing to examine adequately the ideologies that inform unequal power relations and social stratifications” (2), and thus “systematically disorganizing and neutralizing minority cultural identities” (4).
However, Critical pedagogy, on the other hand, challenges both students and teachers to recognize, explore and understand “the interconnecting relationship among ideology, power, and culture” (3) that shape inequalities, prejudices and oppressions prevalent in our society, and furthermore, facilitates a space for a more critical, active exchange of ideas in various forms of communication. Leistyna and Woodrum highly emphasizes that one of the main significances of education is to help the students recognize the ‘differences’ existing in our sociopolitical, economic and historical realities, and that such recognition has to involve understanding and analyzing both ‘you and me’.
I, as an educator, highly agree with their statements as I do believe that in order for the students to grow and become competent to lead and to ‘live’ their lives in the future, the essentiality is not in the ‘facts and information’ and ‘skills’ they passively learned from schools, but in ‘knowing of oneself’ and figuring out how they want to live and which values they want to pursue in their lives; as can be seen in what I call the ‘successful’ lives of Ricardo Levins Morales and Tom Hansell in Research.
And my questions are:
- Do you agree with my last comment and thus with Leistyna and Woodrum regarding the necessity of ‘skills’ and ‘information’ in education (and possibly persuading a ‘successful’ life) in today’s society where certain skills (in IT and etc.) and more importantly, access to information (SNS, internet and etc.) are considered to be valuable?
- Considering that this article was written in 1996, which is about two decades from now, has there been any change in our educational environment? Could you say that such Critical pedagogy is prevalent in current education? If so, has it been as effective as how Leistyna and Woodrum argued and expected?
- Another aspect, which distinguishes critical pedagogy from others, is that “it does not simply take place in schools.” (4) Then the authors mention various media including TV, Internet, movies and etc., as the other ‘locations’, which can also educate and shape the students’ perspectives in an influential way. On that note, what concerns you, as an educator, the most about today’s media? Or any other ‘locations’ apart from school?
- Ricardo, in Research, says, “Art, like language, is a means of communication…” (39) With that in mind, in which ways and forms can we apply such critical pedagogy in art education?
Thank you! 🙂
Chez de Steph 
What Is Critical Pedagogy
We are living in a society which included a diversity of beliefs, values, religions, personal experiences, etc. And it is true that we cannot teach the next generation just by a simple dogmatic standard anymore.
Conservative technocratic models are the mainstream in education which have a lot of disadvantages, these models “dominate mainstream educational programs embrace depersonalized methods for educating students, which often translate into the regulation and standardization of teacher practices and curricula”. The mainstream multicultural education fails to realize or to measure the different race, ethnicity, class, gender, and sexual orientation, which they ideally believe there is one core value which can be published in all the social education.
But as we all know that our society is much more than one single value, different race, ethnic, class, gender and sexual orientation have different beliefs and core value. Thus, critical pedagogy seems like more than necessary, it asks the educator to have an open mind and always let the classroom widely open to embrace different ways, background and personal experiences. There is not only one core value and we cannot simply decide what is the core value or who has the right to dominate or to authorize the central value. Additionally, critical pedagogy does not happen only within school, on the contrary, a variety of methods are to take responsibility to educate a wide range of people in today’s society, therefore, whether we are in or out of classrooms, having a critical sight about all kinds of issues is important for both students and teachers so that we can have less pride and prejudice but more objectively “examine the values, assumptions, ideologies and interests”. Moreover, critical pedagogy in not only stress in context, but also emphasize individuals experience, it is focused on the differences between both groups and individuals.
All in all, it asks a lot effort for us to obtain the critical mind in pedagogy, but it is worth putting a lot of effort into it, for it will benefit both of our personal life and the whole society.
Research
“If Contact can be thought of as looking inward, then Research is about looking outward. The focus is on listening, observing and learning from others beyond your immediate community.”
There are at least two sides of information we need to consider while we are creating an art work, one is from the art side, which need us to think about the images, phrases, stories, places related to the theme. The other one is from the community side, which request us to think about who will we affected by our art work.
“Art like language, is a means of communication, the more intimately I know you, the more able I am to choose words or images that will be meaningful in your life.” All the communities will meet all kinds of difficulties, creating art by listening to others, we will be more open about all kinds of topics which are important in the community and in the end improve our own life.
LikeLike
Pedagogy of the oppressed-chapter 1
From this chapter, I realized the danger behind the oppressed and the oppressor and the relationship between the oppressed and the oppressor, it is not just as simple as one being oppressed and another one give the oppression. On the contrary, things are much more complicated, as the oppressor and the oppressed might change their character or the one used to be the oppressed might become the oppressor without realizing, the line between the oppressor and oppressed groups are so fragile that people have to have a strong mind to realize the switch between these two characters.
This asks me to think about power, once the dominate group obtained the power to authorize this society, then it becomes such a danger for both the oppressor and the oppressed group to realize that they are walking on thin ice of knowledge, it is such a temptation for the oppressing group to manipulate the oppressed group by using propaganda, which for them is so called “education”, and also it is such a task for the oppressed group to alert the danger being used as a target, to be manipulated without realization.
This chapter also remind me another word which is “cynical”, because of the history china has experienced during 1919 to 1949, people that have been oppressed to becoming the oppressor and back to being oppressed again. This helps me to always be aware of what I have been taught, and this skepticism spirit I believe is important for all individuals.
Pedagogy of the oppressed-chapter 2
At the second chapter, the author explain a solution to overcome the difficulty we meet within the oppressed and the oppressor, specifically this relationship within education. There are two ways of education in the chapter which are banking education and problem-posing education. From the author’s point of view, the banking education is a way that is dehumanized as it limits student’s creativity, it treats students as objects of assistance. Oppositely, problem-posing education emphasizes the role of students, to encourage them to be criticized and skeptical about the knowledge and participated in the world, thus, problem-posing education will never serve for the oppressors demands, but it is a spirit so crucial for us to be called as a human race.
The paradox of problem-posing education for me is how it exactly fitted itself in the system so that this educated strategy can be well spread and to enlighten ourselves as humans, as we all know that it is the oppressor who has the right to decide education authority, then problem-posing education will face a very difficult position to be widely taught.
My questions are, if this society is constructed by the oppressor and the oppressed, then it is always the oppressor to design how to educate their citizens, even though once the oppressed group destroyed the oppressor group, naturally, the oppressed will become the oppressor then how could problem-posing education survive?
Let us assume that we have an ideal society for us to use problem-posing education, then how to define knowledge?
LikeLike
LEISTYNA/WOODRUM
In the article, “Context and Culture: What is Critical Pedagogy?”, Leistyna and Woodrum argue for the integration of critical pedagogy in the education system to create socially conscious student bodies. The authors criticize the current structure as being “depersonalized,” and creating teachers that are “passive, ‘objective,’ and ‘efficient’ distributors of information” (p.1). Critical pedagogy challenges the norm by creating a collaborative environment allowing students and teachers to discuss the current issues of their culture, rather than being governed by an all-purpose curriculum.
I believe the authors are speaking to educators specifically, to fight for a change in curriculum, at least within their respective schools first. The hope is that eventually all schools will adopt a curriculum based on critical pedagogy to foster critical thinking, and community and social engagement within students.
In the article, the authors criticize how the “other” is portrayed in current curriculum. From what I understood, the authors want to substitute learning about the “other” for discussion over current issues residing in the schools’ respective district. How would the authors propose to learn about the histories of traditional cultures?
RESEARCH:
In Shwarzman’s “Research,” the author presents two cases of artist involvement within communities. The author introduces artist, Ricardo Levins Moralis, and documentary artist, Tom Hansell. Both artists advocate for respect within documentation and visual representations of communities.
Morales asks, “What is the underlying story here?” I feel his question resonates with Hansell’s journey to depict the story of the Applachian Coal-Hauling Truckers. When artists take on the tasks of representing a community, Hansell believes in reflecting, not only his opinion, but the cultures and stories of all perspectives.
As artists and educators, when we are tasked with discussing social issues, how can we be sure that every perspective is valued?
Lissette Martinez
LikeLike
iii. Another aspect, which distinguishes critical pedagogy from others, is that “it does not simply take place in schools.” (4) Then the authors mention various media including TV, Internet, movies and etc., as the other ‘locations’, which can also educate and shape the students’ perspectives in an influential way. On that note, what concerns you, as an educator, the most about today’s media? Or any other ‘locations’ apart from school?
In the Leistyna and Woodrum reading it’s posited early on that “critical pedagogy reveals that educational practices and knowledge are always produced within particular social and historical conditions,” This statement, when applied to the Freire excerpt, means peasant in his very own oppressive sphere and here within “Context in Culture” the social/historical conditions are something else entirely. As the above blog entry mentions this piece was written nearly two decades ago and now we’re living in a vastly different social sphere, one reliant on social media and bite sized news served with a fast-food mentality. It can be compared to the “ready to wear” educational tactics mentioned by Freire but the power and scope of the internet was never on his radar. We may not agree with how news is being delivered or the way youth interacts (internet, cell-phones) but I think as educators we need to be constantly learning and growing.
My biggest concern is that educators find comfort in historicism and miss out on potential teaching tools because they won’t join students at their prefered level of information consumption. As future (and current) educators I think it’s our responsibility to understand how the media is educating the masses and to find the most effective way to get ‘good’ information into students’ brains. If the end game is to liberate people with the enlightenment of an in depth education then we should be willing to do so with whatever means necessary. Simply put, we should be well versed with the internet and social medias, we should learn about new technologies available to us for our ‘classrooms’, we should read publications that keep us informed of things happening outside of our sphere so we can make connections with a diverse student body.
Additionally, it’s important to understand how information is reported and received because there are tons of false facts out there. We should know how to spot these inconsistencies, how to talk about them and how to prepare our students to question them on their own. Art education specifically is the perfect platform for this because it deals with that dialectic relationship of objective-subjective so loved by Freire. Art is an emotional and academic process and like Ricardo says, “Art, like language, is a means of communication…” (39) and I think that definition of ‘communication’ brings us back to the whole idea of reflection and reaction. The ‘classroom’ is reflection and creating art is our reaction.
So in a classroom of adult students what are some of the ways we could invite those not well versed in new technologies to join us in new processes? And how much of past processes should we allow to affect our teaching? And should we be afraid of power the internet has on our students? Should we being trying to create a generation that’s less connected?
LikeLike
First, I love that there is Korean all over your blog 🙂
This is a great example of the importance of bringing one’s own identity into the discourse for an open exchange. “Listen, observe, and question,” (Reseach 1), and the “praxis” in terms of critical pedagogy discussed in Leistyna & Woodrum’s, Context and Culture, that is the “practice,” of an ongoing reflection and action (5), as a way of avoiding hegemony in educational systems.
The Context and Culture reading was in many ways mirroring Freire’s Chapter 2, of Pedagogy of the Oppressed, and despite being written in 1990’s, is a more modern discussion of Freire’s issues, “back to basics,” depersonalization, standardization that are sadly, still a problem today.
To answer Seung Hye’s question about change in educational environments, I believe it really depends on the location and community of the school, and perhaps how flexible the community has shown itself to be. Now, I do recognize a shift in many of the US educational systems today, the more experimental community schools we discussed last week, and even our own interdisciplinary classes at SAIC, among others I’m sure, but as Lavie mentioned, “why are these charter schools only appearing in affluent neighborhoods?” And even if it is an affluent neighborhood, they are not necessarily willing to experiment, as are many of the more “conservative” neighborhoods in the midwest. They are cemented in their ways, not really considering those voices outside of the dominant group. How then, can we help them understant the importance of thinking outside of their limited paradigm? That they should be engaging participants in their systems (teachers and students alike), and not treat them as objects or “essentializing” them (2) as the media seems to do so well?
LikeLike
Beautiful blog.A virtual room to think:-)
I think about a certain sentence a lot “… critical pedagogues view the contemporary cultural landscape, not as a vista of common traditions and memories, but, rather as a terrain of conflict of differences.” (Page 3) and I think I would like to talk about Seunghye´s 3rd question.
What concerns me most as a teacher?
The text deals with the concept of “critical pedagogy” = critical thinking, in my opinion, strongly with the aspect of DIFFERENCE (in race, gender, class, ethnicity, age and sexual orientation). These areas of life are very present in all of us and make most of our needs and thus of our thinking as humans. Especially focused on the people we work with in the future.
It’s just that I wonder if it is not more effective to work at cultural DIFFERENCES through cultural SIMILARITIES first?
Whats with the things we all have in common ( !Maslow’s hierarchy of needs),isn´t that a way to start with… what we all need and then to focus on why we as humans feel apart in society, what separates us, what prejudices are circulating in society? The text makes it clear how important it is to think as no “common culture” in the United States (and elsewhere in the world).
When it comes to media I think of empowering websites like http://www.couchsurfing.org where people open their home/ culture for other people regardless of their origin, religion, sexual orientation, connect over cultural boundaries. I think of food sharing and similar movements, etc. and I think that I have personally learned the most about cultural differences in comparison with positive examples and “negative” examples of inclusion in society.
The question is not if we need critical pedagogy? YES WE DO. BUT which attidude do we have when we talk about cultural differences? I think I want to be aware, open spaces of reflection etc. but I also dont want to start my way of working through the topic with seeing it a “terrain of conflict” .
To see WHAT makes cultures live together is a good question to turn arround into WHAT doesn´t? Which attidude do we, as art educators and humans need to be a open minded “critical” example for clients/students?
LikeLike
In Context and Cutlure: What is Critical Pedagogy?, Leistyna and Arlie point to the struggle that,”both the conservative and liberal efforts to restructure public schooling are severely limited by the paradigm from which they work, and are thus inadequate and ineffective in dealing with the plethora of today’s societal dilemmas and tensions.” (pg. 1) I could not agree more with this statement because the corporate machine along with divisive politics in our country are taking a toll on public education. The battle to figure out the best plan of action at improving our education system has been influenced by the “conservative technocratic models” (pg.1) thus resulting in a tremendous push to privatize public education. It seems as though bureaucrats are focused on pushing their basic skills testing ideas and rigid structure of learning in the classroom. This system is definitely not in favor of creating outspoken, critical thinkers that will challenge the establishment.
One of the great points of critical pedagogy is the, “concern with the kinds of educational theories and practices that encourage both students and teachers to develop and understanding of the interconnecting relationship among ideology, power and culture.” (pg. 3) I personally embrace a holisitic approach to teaching because we work with students that encounter a wide range of challenges everyday. In a system that is not necessarily inclusive of everyone in society, it is very important to help students become aware of their own abilities to overcome adversity. Mainstream media does not reflect the various cutlures and people that live in our country today. In fact, Leistyna and Woodrum state a critical question, “whose perspectives and interests are defining what it means to be American?” (pg. 3) I hope to pose this question to my students in the near future for their feedback since I do not see my students are passive recipients of information but as critical thinkers.
Seunghye asked what concerns us most as educators about today’s media, and I would respond by saying that it is the lack of diversity that continues to this day. The truth is that diversity and multiculturalism have become political slogans that matter during elections. Diversity and multiculturalism can mean different things to different people. However, it is very difficult to find in mainstream media. Some conservative groups have argued against bilingual programming on TV and radio, but Telemundo and Univision emerged as a result of a need by the Latino community to have information and programming that reflects their values. As a result, other ethnic groups who have gone unrepresented or ignored by the mainstream media have created their own media outlets to engage their communities as well. Once again, I think of Leistyna and Woodrum’s question as to whose perspectives and interests are defining what it means to be American?(pg. 3)
How can the mainstream media become more inclusive without being seen as condescending or pretentious? How can we as educators critically engage our students and people in our communities to pressure the media about the importance of representing all the communities in our society?
LikeLike
I agree with Seunghye that the basic memorized facts, skills, and information are not the most important parts of education. Critical Pedagogy is important because it allows us to question the curriculum that we are taught and see “facts,” and ideas from different perspectives and gain a better understanding of how those perspectives may be influenced. I feel that the social and personal aspects of education, which can sometimes be referred to as the “hidden curriculum” are usually overlooked. Learning how to get along with others, a sense of discipline, emotional intelligence, personal interests and understanding what creates meaning and motivates us can happen in schools unintentionally and give us more important insights than the basic class curriculum.
However, I also feel that learning about subjects that we find difficult and boring, gaining an understanding of perspectives that we disagree with and acquiring fundamental skills are also very important for self growth. Before we can question authority in a critical way, we have to understand the perspective of authority and the roots of that perspective, which is emphasized in Critical Pedagogy.
The media plays a major role in shaping people’s perspectives and usually in very negative connotations. I think it’s best for us to encourage looking at the media through a critical pedagogical perspective, where we have an educational understanding of the entertainment industry and what factors and perspectives influence the programs, news, etc. This will allow us to look at the media with a critical understanding and awareness of all its flaws.
What problems, if any, may arise if teachers use a more critical pedagogical approach to education?
LikeLike
I love the set up of questions adn graphics for the blog…nicely done.
In response to one of Seunghye’s posted questions,
Considering that this article was written in 1996, which is about two decades from now, has there been any change in our educational environment? Could you say that such Critical pedagogy is prevalent in current education? If so, has it been as effective as how Leistyna and Woodrum argued and expected?
In some ways there had always been a limited application of ciritcal pedgaogy in that it has historically been used to problematize oppressive relationships in education, and was not cross-applied to critical appriasal of liberations efforts and techniques in education. For some ardent followers of critical education it was historically posited as a response to unequal and imbalanced rights, privielge, voice, avenues of expression. Yet the central tenet of ciritcality can apply to the benefits and cultural survival of op[pressed communities, and how oppressive comunities have derived ideological approachs from liberation techniques.
Since the 1960’s and 1996, there has been an attempt to answer this limited application, by adding the field of transformative education as the building blocks of a new world post-critical analysis of power. In my opinion, Friere’s original texts were sometimes misconstrued by his neo-Marxist fan-base (myself included) to think that it could only be used to address pain, mariginalization, political violence adn its many subtle forms etc. He always had elements of cultural celebration adn empowerment of identity, but it was seen through the lens of Pedagogy of the Oppressed as oppression challenging/problem-solving dialogics.
If one returns to Freire’s texts there is a re-interpretation that we can add to the 90’s interpretations–that cultural survival and soulful expression within oppressed communities informs the creative spirit for dialogue, conscientization, and growing new worlds of possibility. Did criticality only have to be applied to the dark side of life? Can’t it also be applied to the lightful living that helps comm unties endure adn create free indetities within the power structure?
Do you agree with my last comment and thus with Leistyna and Woodrum regarding the necessity of ‘skills’ and ‘information’ in education (and possibly persuading a ‘successful’ life) in today’s society where certain skills (in IT and etc.) and more importantly, access to information (SNS, internet and etc.) are considered to be valuable?
Indeed at any time in history, prevalent skill bases should always be included as tools of ciritcal pedagogy and transformative education. The Egyption uprising against Mubarak’s governing dictatorship was dependent on a new set of skills related to social media technology. in fact, many technologies are re-creted as tools for liberation, where there were once tools of oppression. On the other end, I would argue that information is not considered valuable today, but access to information in easier ways–information as a resource seems to fall to the wayside in depth and breadth in our recent eras of technology. Brevity and access to infinite info seems to be the new norm.
LikeLike