Social Justice?

Social Justice in Star Trek

            If we accept the definition of social justice as “justice exercised within a society, particularly as it is applied to and among the various social classes of a society,” then we must also accept that social justice looks different to every culture, ethnicity, region, and thought groups. This is what makes it a particularly difficult issue to address in terms of public education because as teachers it is part of our responsibility to make sure that students understand and appreciate their actions and the consequences of their actions in society. But how can we do this in a multicultural classroom?

            To understand how arbitrary the idea of social justice is, I would like to turn to an article called “Recognizing the Big Picture” from the text Philosophy and Star Trek. One of the main points in this article is about how something as silly as race has caused such huge divides in human history. One of the species that it examines are the people of Cheron, which are multicolored individuals. The members of the higher social class have their black skin on the left side of their body and the white on the right. Members of the lower social class have their skin tones reversed. The federation, an advanced and egalitarian society views this as barbaric, but the punishments and treatment of the lower social class are accepted by everyone on the planet Cheron. I guess the real question I am posing then, is how do you teach social justice and try to promote equality when other societies have a totally different perspective of social justice.

            I suppose this is part of our mandate as teachers, to bring a multicultural perspective and understanding into our classrooms.

Critical Pedagogy in Urban Schools

Critical Pedagogy and Popular Culture in an Urban Secondary English Classroom

            Critical pedagogy is an approach to education that focuses on discussion to embolden and empower students that come from adverse backgrounds, but the reality is that this approach to teaching can be valuable in really any setting. Certainly, students from adverse settings may have a harder run through schools that are disadvantaged and underfunded, but the reality of successful pedagogy is that it can be adapted to any setting. Other than the overall impression of critical pedagogy, two sentences really stood out through the article.

            “…it would be dishonest to promote a pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstrap approach within a structural context that facilitated academic underachievement.” This sentence stands out because of the implications in current society. Too often, certain areas, schools, and neighborhoods are referred to in a derogatory way; almost as though there is no chance of any success being born in this area. These teachers, advocates of critical pedagogy, are willing to teach in a manner that is likely to benefit their particular students. In order for this to truly work, their expectations must be high. They are saying that it would be unfair to students to try and teach them to rise above the limits society has set for them in an environment that allows for failure. In essence, this is a total dedication on the teacher’s part. Total dedication can be a benefit in any classroom.

            “…it would be unconscionable to allow students an excuse to fail.” This is another stigma attached to some schools that students there will fail, and then it can be used as an excuse for students to do just that. This is another sentiment of critical pedagogy that can be effective in every classroom in America. Students cannot be given an excuse to fail, as teachers we must work our hardest to not only teach students in the classroom, but also take the time to make sure that we are being successful in that endeavor. The reward for such unending work during the school year is summer break, but for 180 days, teachers should be 100% dedicated to helping students learn.

Critical Pedagogy

Critical Pedagogy

            There was one section of this article that really stood out to me, the section devoted to culture. This stood out because I feel as though culture plays an incredible role in education and is too often understated as a factor of learning. McLaren argues that culture is how a particular group makes sense of its condition of life and the world around them. If, as McLaren suggests, knowledge is a social construction, then the cultural worldview of each student determines how, what, and why they learn. One of the biggest barriers for student learning is relevance, if a student doesn’t understand why they need to know something or how it will benefit them to know something then they are less likely to learn it. Each culture will view the world (and therefore the knowledge to succeed in that world) differently, so what makes information relevant to one student will not make it relevant to all students. This is why teachers must strive to build and understand relationships with students so that they will be able to make knowledge applicable and relevant to them.

            One other section stood out: the “hidden curriculum.” Philosophically, the unintended consequences of actions have always been of concern to mankind. Well it is reasonable to assume that when a teacher spends a vast majority of the week with students, there will be unexpected and unintended consequences of the student/teacher dynamic and relationship. McLaren uses the subject of sexism in describing how hidden curriculum affects a classroom, but the point is that teachers must pay very careful attention to their responses, actions, and behaviors in the classroom. Not only will this help avoid the possibility of instituting a negative hidden curriculum into your classroom, but will also make you a stronger and more meaningful teacher. If each action or behavior has a meaning in the classroom, the teacher will likely be more effective.

Pedagogy of the Oppressed: Chapter 2

Paulo Freire’s “Pedagogy of the Oppressed: Chapter 2”

“McKINLEY AND BEN! THIS IS FOR YOU! It’s a Chaise lounge, we didn’t know if maybe you already had one, we have the receipt if you do.” – J.J. and Gary

            Freire makes several good points in the second chapter of Pedagogy of the Oppressed. The thing that stands out to me is his analysis of the education system, which he likens to banking. For a very long time, this method was the method used in education. Freire cries out against this strategy though, even going so far as to suggest that it makes the students slaves that are incapable of recognizing even their own contributions in the classroom. He then describes how he feels the oppressors use the banking concept to make their “truths” a reality for the slaves that they have intentionally kept ignorant. As teachers, one of the primary objectives is to combat ignorance in society, to help students learn. Freire is right in his assessment of the “banking” system of learning that the students will never have a full understanding of reality if they are only used as receptacles of teacher knowledge and expected to repeat that knowledge for a grade. In this system, learning becomes memorization and repetition of facts that may not have any practical application. One of the things that is taken for granted by many teachers is that factual knowledge doesn’t have immediate application in the real world, so teachers must try to make their learning relevant and applicable outside of the school walls.

            In short, I agree very much with Freire’s assessment and criticism of what he calls the “banking” system of education. I hope, that as a teacher, I can find a way to make learning relevant for students.

Freire's "Pedagogy of the Oppressed:" Chapter 1

Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed

“Well guys, we’ve made it to the end of summer in one piece, except for a few campers who are lepers.” – Beth

            A statement in the first chapter of Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed really stands out, “Dehumanization, which marks not only those whose humanity has been stolen, but also (though in a different way) those who have stolen it.” This suggests that humanity is not lost solely through being oppressed, but rather through the entire process and philosophy of oppression. This is an interesting philosophy to take because then the new question becomes to ask who has been deprived of humanity, those who have had it stripped from them or those who have willingly given it up by becoming oppressors.

            If the goal, according to Freire, is to find a way to counteract oppression (typically through revolution) then that suggests that freedom is a human’s ultimate goal. Freire also makes an interesting point about the ability to gain freedom. It is suggested that every man would want to make each revolution his own private revolution to achieve freedom, but that the reality is that no one man can be free without first arousing the same feelings in other oppressed people and using their help. Furthermore, he elaborates that the individual freedom is the most important because any group, once liberated, can become even more oppressive than the group before it. This has been seen in many places around the world. Freire seems to be suggesting contradiction in the way that humanity seeks for its own independence because it so typically is an independence built in some way upon oppressed peoples.