|
The present state of the American educational system is inundated
with standardization. Students, all too familiar with this systematized
education, are constantly exposed to state-mandated curriculums,
textbooks and teaching methods, standardized tests, student
evaluations, and grading, as well as bureaucratically organized
schools and classrooms. The Standardized Aptitude Test (SAT), reputable
among students as the most despised and feared element of the high
school experience, epitomizes the standardization of America’s
education. The test requires all students pursuing a higher education
to demonstrate not only their mastery of academic subjects such
as geometry, algebra, grammar, and writing, but, more importantly,
the ability to express their knowledge within the idiosyncratic
style and form of the test. Therefore, although claiming to evaluate
critical thinking and understanding, the SAT actually assesses a
student’s ability to test and master the standardized format
and subject matter of the exam.
Additionally, the trends of standardized education
are evident in the classrooms and lecture halls of UCLA in which
the rote memorization, regurgitation and reproduction of scholastic
ideas is encouraged, rather than the cultivation of a thorough understanding
of the subject matter. For example, many students tailor their papers
and academic assignments to reflect the specific ideas taught by
their professors and T.A.s. This selective learning practice illustrates
the repercussions of the grading system
at the University that fails to reward for creative and critical
thinking and, as a result, deters students from thoughtfully analyzing
the course content. Contributing to the problem, students, from
the earliest stages of socialized education, are fostered to function
as passive pupils rather than active learners and are never educated
in the process of critically evaluating academic materials. Thus,
UCLA students are neither taught nor required to think critically,
and when they do, are often penalized. Consequently, critical thinking
continues to remain an anomaly within UCLA’s classrooms.
Opposing this standardized, traditional system
of education, the theory of critical pedagogy seeks to engage students
in an interactive educational experience that encourages insightful
thinking. Examining the philosophical contributions made to critical
pedagogy by Herbert Marcuse and Paulo Freire, along with an interpretation
of its theoretical basis, it is evident that critical pedagogy’s
alternative approach to education promotes a progressive society
focused on protecting individual rights and freedom. Specifically,
a brief consideration of student activism
demonstrates how critical pedagogy is present on university campuses,
even if it does not exist within the classrooms.
The foundations of critical pedagogy are derived
from the critical theory founded in the Frankfurt School. Critical
theory sought to empower individuals within society so that they
could control the cultural, political, and economic aspects of their
lives and gain freedom from the oppressive conditions of society.
Herbert Marcuse was a prominent figure within the Frankfurt school
whose ideas pervade the theory of critical pedagogy. Marcuse studied
the philosophies of Hegel, Marx, and Heidegger, fusing many of their
beliefs with his ideas to create his own variation of critical theory.
In his biography of Marcuse, Douglass
Kellner illuminates the progressive attitude of the philosopher,
noting, “Marcuse sketched the outlines of a non-repressive
civilization which would involve libidinal and non-alienated labor,
play, free and open sexuality, and production of a society and culture
which would further freedom and happiness.” With these leftist
beliefs Marcuse championed for a free society and nourished his
hope for the demise of oppression that suppressed the individual.
Marcuse’s theories and his passion for the liberation of the
individual inspired many of the principles found within the theory
of critical pedagogy.
Applying elements of Marcuse’s critical
theory to academics, Paulo Freire contributed immensely to the theory
of critical pedagogy through his work in Brazil. Freire sought to
liberate native Brazilians from the social, political, and economic
domination of the ruling class. By improving the literacy and general
education of the country, Freire increased the citizen’s critical
consciousness, thus, enabling them to interpret and respond to the
oppressive society they lived in. In an online
summary of Freire’s book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire’s
philosophy is summarized, contending that, “Man's ontological
vocation is to be a Subject who acts upon and transforms his world,
and in so doing moves toward ever new possibilities of fuller and
richer life individually and collectively.” It was Freire’s
belief that individuals have a responsibility to improve society,
and it is through education that individuals are able to develop
the skills needed to make these improvements. Drawing a prominent
correlation between consciousness, raised through education, and
the empowerment of the people, Freire provides a foundation upon
which critical pedagogy is built.
Emerging from the theoretical and practical
philosophies of Marcuse, Freire, and other scholars, critical pedagogy
seeks to raise the consciousness of learners so that they may liberate
themselves from the confines of an oppressive community. Through
the institution of hegemony, dominant members of society are able
to maintain their powerful positions using subtle forms of control.
Interestingly, resistance to this oppression and subordination does
not occur because all members of society, including the oppressed
and the oppressors, fail to question their commonsense interpretations
of society, which they perceive to be the only viable reality. By
limiting access to education and resources, the oppressors preserve
the status quo as well as their dominant position in society. John
Dewey, an extremely influential academic theorist, quoted in the
web-based article “Philosophical
Foundations of Critical Theory and Critical Pedagogy,”
illustrates the contribution that schools make to the maintenance
of hegemony within society, when he notes:
The bonds which connect the subject matter
of school study with the habits and ideals of the social group
are disguised and covered up. The ties are so loosened that it
often appears as if there were none; as if subject matter existed
simply as knowledge on its own independent behalf, and as if study
were the mere act of mastering it for its own sake, irrespective
of any social values.
In this quote Dewey captures the disassociation
of learned facts from the social environment in which they exist
and, thereby, illuminating the lack of critical thinking within
academic institutions. Consequently, as Dewey contends, by failing
to promote the critical understanding of subject matters, schools
reinforce the status quo, along with the social stratification of
society. To counter the negative effects of hegemony upon a society,
critical pedagogy advises oppressed populations to become critically
conscious through an inquisitive and thought-provoking education.
Critical pedagogy hopes to dispel the myths of social stratification
and encourage progressive change to ensure a better the society
for everyone.
Specifically within a classroom setting, critical
pedagogy takes hold in the form of a dialogical model of education
that is marked by deep discussion and consisting in an exchange
of ideas between the educator and the learner. Within the online
article “What
is Critical Pedagogy,” this interaction between the teacher
and the student is emphasized. The article suggests that “Critical
pedagogy is particularly concerned with reconfiguring the traditional
student/ teacher relationship, … (“the banking concept
of education”). Instead, the classroom is envisioned as a
site where new knowledge, grounded in the experiences of students
and teachers alike, is produced through meaningful dialogue.”
Here, critical pedagogy is addressed as an alternative to the traditional
dynamic between educator and learner, or the “banking concept
of education."
The “banking concept” suggests that
students are passive recipients of knowledge, storing information
in their minds and saving it until they are required to withdraw
it for academic endeavors such as a tests and essays. In contrast,
the dialogical theory of education encourages learning to emerge
through conversations between the educator and student. Additionally,
critical pedagogy seeks to promote critical thinking through in-depth
analysis, individual interpretations, and active student participation.
With these conventional approaches to education, critical pedagogists
hope to explicate the subject matter but also position it within
the larger framework of society. A curriculum inspired by critical
pedagogy sharpens the skill of critical thinking, prepares students
to question and change the status quo, and provides the means to
strengthen democracy and advance a more just society.
Although not very established in the classrooms
and lecture halls of the University, critical pedagogy thrives along
the common fairway, Bruinwalk, which serves as a path between classes
and, also, as a hotbed for student
activism at UCLA. These student activists represent the small
population of critical thinkers at UCLA who use their critical consciousness
to question the world they live in and challenge oppressive beliefs.
Lori Vogelgesang and Robert Rhoads are two UCLA professors who question
the place that student activism, such as that witnessed on Briunwalk,
and service learning have within the academic institutions. In their
article “Advancing
a Broad Notion of Public Engagement: The Limitations of Contemporary
Service Learning” they contextulize their argument within
a historical framework and recognize John Dewey’s contribution
to the field of critical pedagogy and student activism. They note
that “John Dewey’s progressive educational vision…
suggests that democratic citizenship involves challenging institutional
and societal structures that may limit fuller forms of democratic
participation. Vogelgesang and Rhoads
effectively summarize the core concept envisioned by Dewey and countless
other critical pedagogists who, through their academic activism,
seek to better society. Actualizing Dewey’s philosophy, UCLA
student activists display components of critical pedagogy with their
concern for democracy and their active promotion of freedom. Thus,
elements of critical pedagogy, although not as present within the
confines of the classroom, do exist on UCLA‘s campus.
Critical Pedagogy presents a valuable approach
to education that has been influenced by great critical theorists
such as Marcuse, Freire, and Dewey, along with many others who have
devoted their life to improving educational systems and democracy.
However, overwhelmed with standardization and passive learning techniques,
universities fail to recognize the potential benefits if they practiced
a more liberal and active system of education such as that promoted
by critical pedagogy. In order to ensure the essential philosophies
of freedom and democracy, academic institutions must encourage critical
thinking and insightful understanding, rather than passive learning.
Therefore, UCLA and other universities would benefit from the implementation
of critical pedagogy on their campuses and within their classrooms.
Additional Sources
http://www.lousiville.edu/journal/workplace/testpagewp.html
http://www.csd.uwa.edu.au/altmodes/to_delivery/critical_pedagogy.html
http://www.wpunj.edu/radteach/
http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/courses/ed253a/newDK/medlit.htm
http://www.perfectfit.orgscience.uiowa.edu/~stevens/critped/page1.htm |