Critical Pedagogy: A Look at the Major Concepts

Critical Pedagogy: A Look at the Major Concepts by Peter McLaren examines: the importance of theory, critical pedagogy and the social construction of knowledge, forms of knowledge, class, culture, dominant culture, subordinate culture, and subculture, cultural forms, hegemony, ideology, prejudice, etc. He does an incredible job of bringing to light the major concepts of critical pedagogy. Like listed above, he breaks this down into categories and does an incredible job of explaining his beliefs. Ideology is the one category of these terms that stood out to me. I found it intriguing how he brought to light how ideology permeates all of social life. I agree with his statement. So much of what we do as educators can be directly or indirectly be linked to our ideology or as he puts it, the ideology we have is a result of our culture upbringing. McLaren, towards the end of this category, goes on to pose a few questions for his readers. These questions are for teachers and they are not simple questions. He wants the teacher to ask the why question, why do we teach this way or that way? Why are we following this way of thinking? In the end, it all boils down to: our ideology.

McLaren wants educators not to be afraid of asking questions. Just because we (teachers) have been teaching a certain way for many years and every other teacher we knows has too, this doesn't mean we shouldn't question why we are doing these certain practices. The teacher needs to open themselves up to the reality that many of these teaching practices are not carved in stone, but are, in reality, socially constructed. Here I agree with McLaren wholeheartedly—teachers need to be critical thinkers. No teaching practice should be taken for granted. I know that—as a future educator—I want to question every teaching practice and ask the why question. I have always been interested with asking why. Therefore, this article was somewhat of a dense read because it had lots of information that made me stop and think deeply. 

Pedagogy of the Oppressed

The excerpt from Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed looks into the relationship between teachers and students from a somewhat outdated worldview. According to Freire, “Education is suffering from narration sickness.” Freire believes the teacher is nothing more than a tyrant. The teacher talks, talks, talks, and drills and grills the poor, helpless student—this is what Freire thinks of teachers. I kind of see where he is coming from—given the fact this article was written in 1993—but I don’t think that teachers today are like this anymore. Traditionally, teachers lectured 90% of the time and students were able to ask questions the reaming 10% of the time. However, today, teachers can and do allow students more opportunity to converse with the teacher and each other. I believe the ration now is 40% lecture time for the teacher and 60% of the time is for the students.

At the end of his long rant on education, Freire makes a bold statement: “No oppressive order could permit the oppressed to begin to question: Why?” I think that sums up his beef with education and educators. He must have been traumatized, as a child, and now feels obligated to tell the world, we need a revolution in education. I think if he would have written this in 2015, he would reconsider his argument because teachers no longer are supposed to be that tyrannical dictator who cracks out the ruler on his or her subservient students. Also, in my experience, teachers allow room for discussion in the class, like never before. Students are expected to talk and share ideas. No longer is it acceptable to pick on the same students over and over again. Therefore, Freire today would—most likely—not be so harsh on teachers because teachers don’t rule with an iron fist any longer. Today, teachers seem to be blamed for everything because many students come from homes that set no boundaries for their kids. Thus, Johnny deserves an A regardless of whether he actually earned it. I actually think teachers are the “oppressed” these days and they need to be encouraged more by society and NOT discouraged. Teachers are truly working with America’s future: the students. 

A Response-Based Approach to Reading Literature

The article A Response-Based Approach to Reading Literature by Judith A. Langer opened my eyes to different ideas on how to better educate students when teaching them literature. Langer helped make it clear what is to be done in the classroom to make students be able to: negotiate their own meanings by exploring possibilities, consider understandings from multiple perspectives, sharpen their own interpretations, and learn about features of literary style and analysis through the insights of their own responses. She wants students to have an experience in the classroom--that teaches literature--in such a way that compels the student to learn in freedom. Many of us have had classes that taught literature through the eyes of the teacher. We knew what the teacher viewed as "right" and "wrong". Langer helps her reader understand: we need to allow room for the students to develop their own ideas and interpretations of the literature. I think this is a great idea. 

When we allow students to interpret literature from their own personal and cultural experiences, they can make a connection. This connection--in essences-- excites them. Literature then comes ALIVE! I know from personal experience: literature—most certainly—comes alive when I connect my readings with my own personal experience. When I connect with the literature, I learn more.  In addition, Langer offered a great guideline for instruction concerning the teaching of literature. She suggested class meetings should be a time when students explore possibilities and develop understanding instead of recounting acquired meanings. This tip—I believe—is one I think that resonates with me the most. I know I learn best when I’m challenged to explore possibilities and develop my own understanding of literature.. All in all, this article helps the reader understand how a teacher can help their students achieve maximum success in a literature class by offering sound advice.

SIOP

The Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) was developed to make content material more comprehensible to English Language Learners. The model was developed by Jana Echevarria, Mary Ellen Vogt and Deborah J. Short. After reading about SIOP, I believe the authors did an incredible job of helping me understand the importance of educating English Language Learners in a way that is simple but not “watered down.” America is becoming increasingly more bilingual and I agree—as educators—we need to know how to teach ELL students in such a way where they actually understand what they are being asked.

I’m bilingual and I remember the frustrations—growing up—I had learning English. I remember having to read the word island. I could not understand why we pronounced it with a silent s. When I would read the word island, I would pronounce it as izland. I also like how SIOP mentioned, “Concepts must be directly related to the students’ background experiences, when possible, whether personal, cultural, or academic.” I believe this is key to helping ELL students; they need to feel connected to the language, so to speak. I remember reading an article which mentioned, we learn best when we can connect something new with something we already know. Thus, when we are teaching—for example—Russian ELL students, we need to take into account their culture, experiences, etc. Also, if we are teaching Spanish ELL, students we need to do the same, every ELL student will be different and so we need to make that cultural connection, if we are to be successful ELL teachers. Therefore, SIOP is an incredibly important tool which educators of ELL students need to take into account. The ideas and practical information offered are—most definitely—something every ELL teacher should consider with his or her students.        

Response to "The Common Core State Standards"

Response to "The Common Core State Standards"

Chapter 1 from, "The Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts Instruction in Grades 6-12," helps the reader understand what these state standards are all about. The chapter explains how—as an educator—curriculum will be shaped by the Common Core State Standards because most states in the US have adopted them. In addition, this chapter helped explain the origins, goals, and challenges CCSS face. CCSS has both positive and negative aspects to it. CCSS were created to help the US have better achieving students who will be ready to face the competitive 21^st century. Having high standards for America’s students helps them meet the high expectations of the 21^st century. But there are negative aspects to CCSS as well.

By 2030—in just 15 years—Americas’ students will be very diverse. Many of today’s ethnic minorities will be the dominant face of America’s future classrooms. No longer will only “white literature” be acceptable and normal to teach. Thus, one negative aspect of CCSS is it can in some ways hinder diversity (the chapter mentioned how this could happen). I felt like I really could identify with the lack of diversity in today’s literature. I went to a predominantly white school and language arts teachers seemed to pick literature that wasn’t diverse enough. I’m glad this chapter mentioned how books need to reflect America’s great growing diversity. I can only imagine how awkward it must be for students who are non-white to read—all day long—about dead white men. Therefore, it was great how this chapter addressed the issue: cultural diversity.

It was also interesting to read about one of the teachers experience in her classroom. The teacher overcame what seemed like the impossible: lack of diverse literature. Although she was teaching a class that was predominately white, she did find a creative way to get around teaching her students diverse literature. I found it intriguing how the majority of the class wanted to learn about different cultures. This was telling. All in all, this chapter helped me better understand the history, positives, and negatives of CCSS. 

Discussion as a Way of Teaching

I found this article to be insightful and full of common sense type of stuff. I enjoyed the tips the author provided on how to teach discussion and why it is beneficial for the teacher and students. I especially enjoyed reading “Practicing the dispositions of democratic discussion” part of the pamphlet. Practicing the nine dispositions mentioned: hospitality, participation, mindfulness, humility, mutuality, deliberation, appreciation, hope, and autonomy will definitely benefit a classroom discussion. The disposition which stood out to me was: humility. Humility seems to be missing in many discussions today. Because we live in the Information Age, people assume they know it all. I know I have to stop myself and remind myself—often during discussions—that my knowledge is limited. I liked how the article mentioned, “Humility helps us remember that learning is always an uncertain, even uneasy quest.” This puts it all into perspective. At the end of the day, humility is—in my humble opinion—the key ingredient to having a successful and engaging discussion.  I want to always remember this because when I forget humility, I forget what it means to truly have a democratic discussion.

Chapter 2 of the pamphlet was an interesting read as well. This chapter discussed the fifteen benefits of discussion. There was one benefit which stood out to me: discussion develops new appreciation for continuing difference. I found this benefit to be very insightful. I thought the author hit the nail on the head when he wrote, “An airing of differences can stimulate more discussion and provide an opportunity to clarify one’s views in relation to another’s. This is exactly why I found this benefit of discussion to be the most eye revealing for me. Therefore, as a future teacher, now I understand more clearly the great benefits of discussion and how to make great discussions take place in the classroom—thanks to this great read.