Critical pedagogy is a philosophy that “applies the tenets of critical social theory to the educational arena and takes on the task of examining how schools reproduce inequality and injustice” (Beck, 2005).
Critical pedagogy as developed by critical literacy elements in the classroom invites and encourages students to question issues of power. These issues include multiple indicators: socioeconomic status (SES), race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and age (Cervetti, Pardales, & Damico, 2001).
much education research takes the form of collecting data on people’s ability to learn nonsense.
where scientific theory conflicts strongly with the basic empathic responses of ordinary people, history (and Jane Goodall) would suggest that it’s a good idea to pay attention to those conflicts.
There’s an Orwellian quality to the spectacle of cognitive scientists reasoning from their own inability to meaningfully address the differences in our children to a finding that our children don’t have meaningful differences after all.
What needs to be noted here is how the claim that LEARNING STYLES DON’T EXIST has morphed directly and explicitly into a claim about lower intelligence in certain children.
The question, then, is this: is there a scientific reason we should assume every difference is a deficit until proven otherwise?
Or is there a historical reason that difference was framed as deficit from the beginning, intentionally, to perpetuate and justify a hierarchical society of winners and losers?
So before we uncritically accept the debunkers’ claim that the scientific research supports a One-Style-Fits-All approach to instruction, we should stop and ask ourselves: “Who invented that One Style? Who succeeds by it, and who fails? What historical power structures does it emanate from, and whose power does it perpetuate and reproduce?
The logic goes like this:
What “works?” Direct instruction. How do we know? Tests. Who designs the tests? The same people who have always designed the tests.
Source: Science / Fiction — Carol Black
I updated “Books that influenced my views on education and learning ” with some new books.
- When Grit Isn’t Enough: A High School Principal Examines How Poverty and Inequality Thwart the College-for-All Promise by Linda Nathan
- The Essential Elements of Digital Literacies by Doug Belshaw
- Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor by Virginia Eubanks
- Paying the Price: College Costs, Financial Aid, and the Betrayal of the American Dream by Sara Goldrick-Rab
As the Boomers age, grandparents and grandchildren will vie for scarce funds.
If the underlying problem behind all these issues is competition for funding, couldn’t we also say that the underlying issue is the lack of funding?
Could we not say that the underlying problem is that too few people are collecting too much of the wealth generated by the economy and paying too little tax on it?
doesn’t the fact that some states have to choose between being sensible and being civilized– isn’t that a sign that we may have veered a bit too far in the direction of using government primarily to service the desires corporations and the rich folks who run them? Because I don’t think there’s anything sensible or civilized about a country that makes Grampaw and Junior fight over table scraps while the rich are grabbing more food than they know what to do with.
“There is no way to cultivate equity through an ideological standpoint, like deficit or grit ideology, that is formulated to discourage direct responses to inequity.”
I added selections from “Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy” and “Opinion | The ‘Roseanne’ Reboot Is Funny. I’m Not Going to Keep Watching. – The New York Times” to “To the family Trumpists”.
“Needless to say, racists don’t spend a lot of time hunting down reliable data to train their twisted models. And once their model morphs into a belief, it becomes hardwired. It generates poisonous assumptions, yet rarely tests them, settling instead for data that seems to confirm and fortify them. Consequently, racism is the most slovenly of predictive models. It is powered by haphazard data gathering and spurious correlations, reinforced by institutional inequities, and polluted by confirmation bias. In this way, oddly enough, racism operates like many of the WMDs I’ll be describing in this book.”
They act as if love can protect the most vulnerable members of their family from the repercussions of their political choices. It cannot.
You are the family bigots. That is your legacy. That is how you will be remembered.
Source: To the family Trumpists