First World Domestication of Critical Pedagogy: Unveiling the Ruse of Social Activism in American Classrooms
Abstract
Paulo Freire, the renowned founder of critical pedagogy, used his own personal experience with poverty and his work with adults in literacy programs to forge a Third World pedagogical paradigm so dynamic that it is subject to inappropriate domestication in the First World. Some of the misalignment of Freirean theory comes from educationists and activists trying to solve First World education problems with a theoretical framework that was specifically designed to activate transformation, consciousness, and revolution among oppressed peoples in the Third World. Most of the domestication is a product of individuals not thoroughly reading and understanding Freire’s work, not acknowledging or even being aware of his ideological evolution, and using shallow or specious applications of his theory’s constructs in the classroom, education courses and programs, and even peer discussions. His legacy, like many indigenous foreigners, while still celebrated, is often permeated with misappropriations, misconceptions, and misuses of his ideas. Most importantly, in regards to Freire’s theory, there is the risk of spreading it too thin or stretching it beyond its narrative. Freire cannot be everything to everybody because his work cannot be turned into something it is not. When scholars and activists use his ideas, they have reduced his pedagogy to a set of techniques, skills, or methods, which is only one part of the program. They fail to take into account culture, humanism, and the enhancement of consciousness. To him, pedagogy involved a complex philosophical and political practice of education, not the North American obsession with teaching methods.
Presentation Description
This presentation offers an examination of Freirean critical pedagogy in its Third World social and historical context and why its transportation to First World schools with similar oppressive conditions do not often bring about empowerment. It intends to provoke discussions about authentic ways to place theory into practice without committing practitioner error or feigning attempts at sound implementation. It cautions that any misappropriation of critical pedagogy puts it at risk of suffering the same skepticism that Deweyian progressivism has endured.
Keywords
Critical pedagogy, Paulo Freire, John Dewey, indigenous foreigner, social justice, urban public schools, oppression
Location
Room B
Publication Type and Release Option
Presentation (Open Access)
Recommended Citation
Foster, Marquita D., "First World Domestication of Critical Pedagogy: Unveiling the Ruse of Social Activism in American Classrooms" (2018). Curriculum Studies Summer Collaborative. 10.
https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/cssc/2018/2018/10
First World Domestication of Critical Pedagogy: Unveiling the Ruse of Social Activism in American Classrooms
Room B
Paulo Freire, the renowned founder of critical pedagogy, used his own personal experience with poverty and his work with adults in literacy programs to forge a Third World pedagogical paradigm so dynamic that it is subject to inappropriate domestication in the First World. Some of the misalignment of Freirean theory comes from educationists and activists trying to solve First World education problems with a theoretical framework that was specifically designed to activate transformation, consciousness, and revolution among oppressed peoples in the Third World. Most of the domestication is a product of individuals not thoroughly reading and understanding Freire’s work, not acknowledging or even being aware of his ideological evolution, and using shallow or specious applications of his theory’s constructs in the classroom, education courses and programs, and even peer discussions. His legacy, like many indigenous foreigners, while still celebrated, is often permeated with misappropriations, misconceptions, and misuses of his ideas. Most importantly, in regards to Freire’s theory, there is the risk of spreading it too thin or stretching it beyond its narrative. Freire cannot be everything to everybody because his work cannot be turned into something it is not. When scholars and activists use his ideas, they have reduced his pedagogy to a set of techniques, skills, or methods, which is only one part of the program. They fail to take into account culture, humanism, and the enhancement of consciousness. To him, pedagogy involved a complex philosophical and political practice of education, not the North American obsession with teaching methods.
