Pedagogy of the Oppressed: Chapter 4
This episode is the final episode of a miniseries that unpacks Paulo Freire’s (1970) book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” This particular episode unpacks chapter 4, which synthesizes the concepts introduced in the previous chapters and discusses the difference between anti-dialogical and dialogical practices in education (and at large). This episode builds off the previous unpacking scholarship episodes on chapter one, chapter two, and chapter three so make sure you listen to those episodes before jumping in here.
-
welcome back to another episode of the
csk8 podcast
my name is jared o'leary in this week's
episode i am doing a solo episode where
i unpack scholarship
in particular i am concluding a mini
series on paulo freyr's book
pedagogy of the oppressed so today's
episode is going to unpack chapter four
so if you haven't listened to my
discussions on chapters one two and
three
i highly recommend starting there first
because this chapter synthesizes
many of the understandings previously
talked about and in particular
discusses a theoretical framework around
creating dialogue
as a leader now before we get started i
want to say that even though this is the
final
episode of this mini series i do highly
recommend you actually read through the
book there's a lot of nuances and
examples
and discussions in there that i simply
cannot put into this podcast
because i'm just trying to quickly
summarize some of the main points
in relation to cs education so as
mentioned previously especially in the
discussion on chapter three
freddy argues that human activity is
comprised of both
action and reflection that occur
simultaneously so we can't just have one
without the other so here's a quote from
page 118 quote human activity consists
of action
and reflection it is praxis it is
transformation of the world and as
praxis
it requires theory to illuminate it end
quote so it's not enough
to just reflect on theory without action
or to take action without
having a guiding theory we need to do
both so as i mentioned in
chapter three's podcast that came out
two weeks ago we need to as
educators engage in critical reflection
of the theories that inform that we are
doing
as well as these social pressures or
influences
that are informing what we do in the
classroom
for example the learning theories the
specific standards
the administrators rules or guidelines
etc all of these things
all inform what we do and i argue as
well as
freddie that we need to actually
critically reflect on these things
and act upon them intentionally not just
blindly
engaging in practices without reflecting
on the why or the how
now as educational leaders ferreri makes
a point that
leaders cannot simply take
responsibility for coordinating
or even sometimes directing action
however it's important as
educators and leaders to clarify that
leaders can take responsibility for
coordinating or sometimes directing
action
however freddie points out that it is
not through an imposition
of values ideas ways of being on other
people
instead the oppressed also need the
opportunity to reflect on their actions
otherwise their actions can be a form of
manipulation for gaining power
for others in other words leaders cannot
simply lead through domination of the
oppressed
so if you're listening to this podcast
and i'm like cool critical pedagogy
sounds amazing i want to engage in these
liberatory practices
it's not okay for us to just all of a
sudden go into the classroom virtually
or in person
and start saying you need to do this and
you need to think this way and you need
to engage in critical reflection etc we
actually have to engage in dialogical
processes
that we will talk about further in this
episode
and that we talked about in the episode
for chapter three
one of the reasons why freddy points
this out and wants to clarify this
towards the start of this chapter
is that he posits that it's not okay to
carry out a revolution for a group of
people
because doing so is equivalent to doing
a revolution without
the people quote
to simply think about the people as the
dominators do
without any self-giving in that thought
to fail to think with the people
is a sure way to cease being
revolutionary leaders end quote
from page 124. so to engage in such
dialogue leaders
quote cannot believe in the myth of the
ignorance of the people end quote
age 126 nor can they sloganize the
people
so instead they quote must enter into
dialogue with them so that the people's
empirical knowledge of reality
nourished by the leaders is critical
knowledge gradually becomes transformed
into knowledge of the causes of reality
end quote
from page 126. so in other words
leaders need to engage in continuous and
permanent dialogue
from the onset of dismantling power
structures
if we don't then we are instead taking a
position as oppressors
despite being well intentioned okay so
a large portion of this particular
chapter
presents two opposing practices
one is anti-dialogical practices that
are meant to maintain control
and the other are dialogical practices
that are meant to liberate and humanize
people
so the first part that we're going to
unpack is the anti-dialogical practice
anti-dialogical practices have four main
characteristics that
freddy mentions one is conquest the next
is dividing and conquering
the next one is manipulating and the
last one is
cultural invasion so we're going to
unpack each of these four
and after that i'm going to talk about
dialogical practices
and the different characteristics of
that which are the practices that
peri recommends as a critical pedagogy
okay so conquest this particular
characteristic of
anti-dialogical practices is to conquer
a group of people
in order to maintain power through the
control of another group of people
however freddy notes that some who
conquer will do so in a way
that makes it appear as though they are
giving up their power
when in reality their actions are really
to maintain control
so it is an example that was discussed
romans would
give bread and circus to people in order
to quote soften them up
so even though they were conquering
people and their ways of being and their
ways of knowing
or ways of viewing the world so there
are epistemologies
axiologies ontologies if you want to use
some fancy words
they were doing so in a way that made it
seem like oh we're helping you we're
giving you food we're giving you
entertainment
as long as we maintain this form of
control
between oppressor and oppressed okay so
now let's talk about the second
characteristic so this one's going to be
a little bit longer discussion so this
is on divide and conquer
here's a quote from pages 131 to 132
that discusses this quote as the
oppressor minority
subordinates and dominates the majority
it must divide it and keep it divided in
order to remain in power
the minority cannot permit itself the
luxury of tolerating the unification of
the people
which would undoubtedly signify a
serious threat to their own hegemony
accordingly the minority cannot permit
itself the luxury of tolerating the
unification of the people
which would undoubtedly signify a
serious threat to their own hegemony
accordingly the oppressors halt by any
method
including violence any action which in
even incipient fashion
could awaken the oppressed to the need
for unity
concepts such as unity organization and
struggle
are immediately labeled as dangerous in
fact
of course these concepts are dangerous
to the oppressors
for the realization is necessary to
actions of liberation
end quote so this particular section on
dividing and conquering
again this book was written in 1970 so
this conversation is very relevant
with what's going on right now in black
lives matter
in 2020 as well as politics
as well as just how people are
communicating with each other
across these social divides that have
widened over the last few years
or even decades one of the things that
freddie notes as a tactic for dividing
and conquering
is that the oppressors further divide
and conquering by distributing benefits
and penalties that seek to preserve the
current power structure
so as an example of what's going on with
black lives matter some people
are quoting and promoting a small number
of black conservatives
who condemn protests that turn violent
while vilifying
a person who peacefully takes a knee so
in other words
we are providing benefits to people who
are saying
violence is wrong but we are penalizing
people who are
peacefully protesting the same topic
this according to freyri is a form of
oppression and maintaining
power and control over a group of
individuals here's a quote from page 135
quote dividing in order to preserve the
status quo then
is necessarily a fundamental objective
of the theory of anti-dialogical action
in addition dominators try to present
themselves as
saviors of the women and men they
dehumanize and divide
this messianism however cannot conceal
their true intention
to save themselves they must save their
riches their power
their way of life the things that enable
them to subjugate
others end quote from page 135.
so another approach of oppressors is to
divide while making it appear as though
they are actually defending the
oppressed
now as a contemporary example in 2020
politicians in recent years
have been saying for quite some time now
that they're
here for the people and they want to
help the oppressed
but then they end up passing laws that
favor corporations and business owners
over the individuals that they said they
are going to protect now one way that we
as educators might be able to look at
divide and conquer in relation to the
classroom setting
is think about how kids are divided and
conquered
whether it be by grade level whether it
be
between grade levels in terms of having
several different classes
for let's say third grade or even within
specific classes by dividing by the
quote gifted
talented or the kids who need more
support
although it allows us to work one-on-one
with people this is also still a form of
dividing and conquering in other england
people
yes it provides support and services but
there are
many ways of learning that involve
learning across grade levels
in terms of vertical learning in terms
of also learning across
different levels of expertise and
learning from each other so the
so-called
gifted and talented kids can work
alongside the kids who need extra
support
so we don't necessarily have to divide
and conquer so freddie might argue that
instead of having grade levels
instead of having these different groups
why don't we work across
experiences across grades across ages
etc
having worked in settings like that it
works really well
but i also understand that this approach
goes against what many people might be
thinking right now
of yeah but if i have all of the kids
who are struggling on a topic in the
same group
it's easier for me to work with him on
that topic or if i have all the kids who
are excelling in a topic on something
it's easy for me to work with him on
that my response on to that might be
it's only easier if we are teaching to
the average or to the mean
rather than teaching individuals and
working alongside individuals
so that's my polite counterpoint to say
that it is still a form of dividing and
conquering
if we are dividing up groups by
abilities ages
experience etc and i say that with love
to everyone
i too am guilty of oppressing people
constantly reflecting on it trying to
work on it
so not trying to point fingers or
anything like that especially because
this form of dividing and conquering is
usually outside of the control of
teachers
so while i did not enjoy grade levels
the structure of the districts that i've
worked in
at most had three grade levels combined
that was a rare exception most of the
classes were
single grade level by experience etc
and that was out of my control as a
single teacher that would be more in the
control of
administration superintendents etc okay
so let's talk about the
third characteristic of anti-dialogical
practices
this characteristic is manipulation so
freddy argues that manipulation is done
through a series of myths
such as quote the model of itself which
of the
bourgeoisie presents to the people as
the possibility for their own
ascent in order for the myths to
function however the people must accept
the world of the bourgeoisie
end quote from page 136 so in other
words
the oppressors are presenting a model of
the world
and are giving paths for which people
can ascend through that
but by ascending through it and
vilifying and demonizing some people
who do not follow the norms and praising
people who do
follow the very specific view of the
world
we are perpetuating these forms of
oppression that i talked about in
chapter two
and in chapter one so as an example of
this in the classroom so manipulation
could be something along
the lines of rewarding certain ways of
creating in
computer science or through coding as
a path for ascending in achieving a high
grade in the class
or being able to work on more
complicated more interesting assignments
while also penalizing other ways of
engaging in computer science or engaging
in coding
so another approach for manipulating the
oppressed is by giving
unauthentic forms of organization that
avoid questioning the status quo but
give a sense of power
so as an example of this it might be
like student forms of government
so we have a student president student
vice president secretary etc
but the tasks and responsibilities that
we give to them
avoid questioning the status quo of
students in the school but instead focus
on menial things that maintain the power
dynamics that are at play
now i could also argue that some of the
interest-driven practices that i promote
could be viewed as a form of
manipulation so as an example of that
although students are able to choose
projects and topics of interest
that they can explore through computer
science or coding
they are likely forced to participate in
such practices and are unable to
question
such mandates among other reasons this
is one of the reasons why i am not
actually
a fan of mandatory subjects or classes
which i will talk about
towards the end of this particular
episode so in other words
even though kids were able to create
projects that were interesting to them
they were still required to create a
project while engaging in coding
practices in the classes that
i facilitated and the reason why is
because
that's what they received a grade for
and this was imposed upon me
by administrators so i had to give a
grade
and it had to be for engaging and coding
i couldn't just say
oh this kid's a great basketball player
so therefore a plus
okay so the last characteristic of
anti-dialogical action is
cultural invasion which is when quote
the invaders
penetrate the cultural context of
another group
in disrespect of the latter's
potentiality they impose their own view
of the world upon those they invade
and inhibit the creativity of the
invaded by curbing their expression
in quote from page 141 here's another
quote from page 148 that further
clarifies
what cultural invasion is quote cultural
invasion
which serves the ends of conquest and
the preservation of oppression
always involves a parochial view of
reality a static perception of the world
and the imposition of one worldview upon
another
it implies the superiority of the
invader and the inferiority
of those who are invaded as well as the
imposition of values by the former
who possesses the latter and are afraid
of losing them
cultural invasion further signifies that
the ultimate seat of decision regarding
the action of those who are invaded lies
not with them but with the invaders
and when the power of decision is
located outside rather than within the
one who should decide
the latter has only the illusion of
deciding end quote
exactly how do they do this how do they
invade a culture
here's a quote from page 141 that talks
about that quote
cultural conquest leads to the cultural
inauthenticity of those who are invaded
they begin to respond to the values the
standards and the goals of the invaders
in their passion to dominate to mold
others to their patterns
and their way of life the invaders
desire to know
how those they have invaded apprehend
reality
but only so they can dominate the latter
more effectively
in cultural invasion it is essential
that those who are invaded
come to see the reality with the outlook
of the invaders rather than their own
for the more they mimic the invaders the
more stable the position of the latter
becomes
in quotes from page 141 okay so i know
those were some long quotes so let's
unpack that a little bit
the basic premise of cultural invasion
in education
is that kids might come into education
with some preconceived ideas of what
they want to learn
and what they want to get out of
schooling if we view that as
a culture or as interests or however we
want to describe it
school itself and the pedagogies that we
use in it
can act as a form of invasion
on those ways of knowing and being and
thinking
so as an example in computer science if
a student comes into a class
and really wants to learn how to be a
game developer like that
is their something they value highly
they love playing video games like i
do they love creating them they love
designing levels
creating mechanics etc but instead
the computer science class only focuses
on other ways of engaging
in computer science or coding
this could be a form of cultural
invasion it is saying yes
we know that you value this thing and
this is something that you are a part of
and that you value and that you love and
want to learn more about however
we think you need to learn all these
other things well i certainly see a lot
of benefit and have
experienced learning topics that i
didn't realize i was going to be very
passionate about
breri would argue that this is still a
form of cultural invasion
despite how well intentioned it is by
saying this is how you engage in
computer
science and coding and this is what we
expect you to learn and work on
it is a form of cultural invasion or
epistemological or ontological
colonization in other words colonizing
the ways of knowing and being
a computer scientist or a programmer one
of the ways that
oppressors ensure this approach succeeds
is by convincing the oppressed
that their culture is intrinsically
inferior compared to the culture of the
dominating culture
so going back to the example that i just
gave it would be saying well yeah i know
you want to learn
how to program games and design them but
that's not as important as learning
about
networks and databases and other topics
that are outside of
gaming and game design etc
now building off of that freddy notes
that an unsaid role of schooling
is to prepare future invaders by
perpetuating the myth
that the dominant culture is superior to
the culture of the oppressed
so all this being said these
anti-dialogical practices that ferry is
talking about the
conquest divide and conquer manipulation
and cultural invasion
educators who reflect on these things
and think back on how they were taught
and how they are currently teaching
might come to a realization that they
are unintentionally engaging in
oppressive practices this can create a
cognitive dissonance
with the teachers because it's like well
this really worked well for me and i
learned all these things and
like i enjoyed school so i became an
educator
so is it really hurting kids all that
much etc
here's a particular quote that will
relate to this
so this is from page 144 quote
well-intentioned professionals
those who use invasion not as a
deliberate ideology but as the
expression of their own
upbringing eventually discover that
certain
other educational failures must be
ascribed not to the intrinsic
inferiority of the simple men of the
people
but to the violence of their own act of
invasion
those who make this discovery face a
difficult alternative
they feel the need to renounce invasion
but patterns of domination are so
entrenched within them that this
renunciation would become a threat to
their own identities
to renounce invasion would mean ending
their dual status as dominated and
dominators
it would mean abandoning all the myths
which nourish invasion
and starting to incarnate dialogical
action
now this form of socialization
of learning through people who are
oppressing
future educators who then become
educators and end up
unknowingly oppress others this kind of
socialization
impacts everyone so here's a quote from
page 144-146
quote professional women and men of any
specialty
university graduates or not are
individuals who have been determined
from above
by cultural domination which has
constituted them as dual beings
if they had come from lower classes this
miseducation would be the same
if not worse end quote in other words
this happens to everybody
so me reading the stuff about domination
anti-dialogical practices this isn't me
saying hey
you person who's listening you're doing
this horrible thing you need to wise up
this is everybody myself freddie
everybody who's ever existed who is
engaging in some kind of
socialization that can relate to
oppression and the oppressed
according to freddie at least now to
prevent this
from happening freddie recommends
engaging in permanent dialogue between
leaders and
people that way people are able to
continue critical reflection and action
which makes it harder for this kind of
cultural invasion to occur
so before i talk about how to combat
these anti-dialogical practices
let's talk about what freddy mentions as
leaders
which for the purposes of this podcast
we could think of
leaders as cs educators researchers etc
so freddie suggests that leaders
typically belong
to the oppressing class in one way or
another and at some point
they renounce their position with such a
class and join the people
so to do this quote the people must find
themselves in the emerging leaders
and the latter must find themselves in
the people end quote from page 150.
so how a leader presents or aligns
themselves
to the cause may present a leader and
people
as a contradiction to the oppressors or
it may position them in a triangular
relationship with the oppressors and the
oppressed so in other words
as a cs educator depending on how you
position yourself you might position
yourself with those who are oppressed
like students or you might position
yourself as an outsider
to both the oppressors and the oppressed
the one way you could potentially think
of that
is students being one point on a
triangle
yourself being on another point on a
triangle and maybe like administrators
or
policies or standards being the third
point on the triangle
ferry however recommends that educators
not position themselves within that
triangular
approach instead he recommends aligning
with the
people who are oppressed in this case
likely the students that you're
thinking of right now so as an example
of
how you can align yourself think of the
conversations from the discussion on
chapter two
on the teacher hyphen student and the
student hyphen teacher
or other conversations i've had on
facilitating
this kind of positioning of a teacher
student
means that you are able to learn
alongside and with the kids that you
work with
however you are still in a leadership
position so as an example of that when i
talk about facilitating and some of the
interviews that i've done in previous
episodes
i mentioned that i am constantly trying
to learn alongside with
and from the kids that i work with but
ultimately i was the one who had to
assign the grade
and i was the one who had final say on
the design of the class even though kids
had input in it
i still was the leader within that
particular space or context
but again even though i was trying not
to i could argue that many of the
practices that we ended up engaging in
were forms of oppression
now to bill off of that if teachers are
leaders within a space
what distinguishes them from the
oppressor quote
what distinguishes revolutionary leaders
from the dominant elite is not only
their objectives but their procedures
if they act in the same way the
objectives become identical
it is as self-contradictory for the
dominant elites to pose
human world relations as problems to the
people
as it is for the revolutionary leaders
not to do so end quote
this is from pages 153 to 154
so again building off of the
conversation on chapter 2
and chapter 3 leaders need to engage in
dialogue
with the kids that they're working with
and freddie recommends engaging in a
problem-posing approach
to education that i've talked about in
the other episodes in this little mini
series
okay now to combat the anti-dialogical
practices
freddy has four main ways of engaging in
dialogical practices
so one is cooperation the second one is
unity for liberation
the third one is organization and the
fourth
characteristic is cultural synthesis so
let's unpack each of these
at the close of this particular chapter
so cooperation
so building off the question of when are
teachers leaders and when
are they oppressors teachers are leaders
through cooperation
quote leaders in spite of their
important fundamental
and indispensable role do not own the
people and have no right to steer the
people blindly towards their salvation
end quote age 154 so the kinds of
transformations that
have been discussed since the very first
episode on this mini-series
is done through dialogue and cooperation
through this cooperation people need to
uncover the forms of oppression
on their own through critical reflection
and dialogue which result in some kind
of an action
rather than having leaders do the work
for the oppressed or on their own
so what i talked about in the episode
two weeks ago
for chapter three it is not simply
enough
to make assumptions about how students
perceive
they are being impressed as an example i
gave the robotics
course the example that i gave is
assuming that students
who don't have a robotics course would
really want that we need to actually
engage in dialogue and cooperate with
kids
to learn from them to figure out what it
is they actually want for example
the one that i mentioned two weeks ago
maybe instead they want a game design
class
okay so the next characteristic unity
for liberation
so anti-dialogical practices seek
division
whereas dialogical practices seek unity
for liberation
so in other words synthesizing
discussions from previous chapters
the entire point of dialogical practices
is to unify for and through liberation
it is not to flip it so that now the
oppressed are the oppressors
it is to unify and continue to engage in
permanent critical reflection
and action that seeks transformation
to humanize society a group etc
so the third characteristic on
organization so in order to actually
unify people
leaders need to assist with organizing
people around the common task of the
struggle for liberation
so freddie suggests organization should
occur around the consistency of words
and actions
so the boldness to confront risks
increase action
encouraging love through the liberation
of humankind rather than demonizing
oppressors
so some considerations around
organization include
thinking about the consistency between
words and actions
when you're organizing and communicating
the overall boldness
to confront risks increasing action
encouraging love through liberation of
humankind
rather than demonizing oppressors and
having faith in people
now an important note is that
revolutionary leaders also need to
organize themselves
with the people not just among other
leaders
so this is one of the many reasons why i
actually don't refer to myself as dr
o'leary
and why you will often see me presenting
at conferences like
international conferences while wearing
the same clothing that i would wear in
the classroom or at the grocery store
they're like jeans and a shirt one of
the reasons why i do this is i want to
align myself with the people i went into
education for
rather than separate myself as being an
outsider sitting on some kind of an
ivory tower
in academia now that being said some
people will view my
attire and resistance to my title as
being unprofessional or uncaring however
i would argue
that's perpetuating a form of oppression
where
some ways being are intended to speak on
the behalf of other educators and
students
rather than with educators or students
so as a more concrete example of this
if you happen to go to a research heavy
conference you'll notice a lot of people
walking around
in suits whereas if you go to the
practitioner heavy conferences you'll
notice a lot of people walk around
in shorts t-shirts things like that a
question that i have
for that that kind of contrast is what
does that say about the kinds of people
who can
engage in and discuss research
in my opinion equating professionalism
to wearing
expensive forms of attire and going by
titles such as dr blah blah blah are
forms of separating yourself
from practitioners it's also a form of
separating yourself from lower
socioeconomic status
so i don't wear a suit when i go to
those presentations
and i certainly stand out so my question
for listeners is
whose narratives are being forwarded
when we have a definition of what is
considered to be
quote professional dress or attire why
are we trying to look like politicians
or business executives when we attend
conferences
why are we trying to look like we work
in an office when we are
helping kids there's no right or wrong
answer to this just kind of posing it as
something to think through
so my larger point is that if we are
going to be organizing ourselves as
leaders we need to make sure that we
organize ourselves with
the communities with the kids with the
parents etc that we are trying to
assist through liberatory and critical
pedagogical practices
okay so in my rant right there all right
so the last
section on this particular book and in
this chapter is
on cultural synthesis so this is the
last characteristic of dialogical
practices
quote in cultural synthesis the actors
who come from
another world to the world of the people
do so not as invaders
they do not come to teach or to transmit
or to give anything
but rather to learn with the people
about the people's world
end quote that's from page 165.
so when i went into education i went
into it as i mentioned previously
because i wanted to help other people i
was suicidal in high school and much of
my undergrad
and the music practices that i was
engaging
in literally kept me alive so when i
went into education i wanted to do
something similar i wanted to give
to others what had really helped me out
significantly
what i quickly realized is that not
everyone is going to
need that kind of support through that
kind of subject area
in that kind of a way and i eventually
started to
broaden out my horizons to start
exploring computer science and other
subject areas
and their intersections and whatnot when
i went back into the classroom
after finishing all my coursework
for my doctorate i i realized that i
took an approach that heavily aligned
with what
friede is describing as cultural
synthesis so i was trying to learn
with students and learn about the things
they're interested in and how they
could explore those interests through
computer science and through coding
so rather than going into a cs class or
a coding class and saying
here's my view of reality and i'm going
to transmit my view to you
it instead is about exploring
students relationships with computer
science
with coding with the world how those all
interact
in different ways and this again builds
off of the ideas of like culturally
relevant pedagogy
and interest-driven learning and whatnot
that i've talked about in
several other episodes all right so as
with every other unpacking scholarship
episode i'm going to now
kind of share some of my lingering
questions and thoughts after having read
this particular chapter as well as some
of my overall thoughts
after having read the entire book so one
of my biggest questions
is that i have intentionally saved until
this
final podcast is why doesn't the author
provide
more evidence to support their claims so
although some of the chapters like
chapters 3 and 4
have some evidence to back up their
claims the book reads more of
as an op-ed piece that i agree with
but it lacks citations to multiple
verifiable
acts and events that ground the
conversation in something we can analyze
deconstruct critique etc now to clarify
i'm not taking a positivist view to say
that
theory without application or a context
to deconstruct something
is meaningless what i am saying is that
it's important to note that although the
book
was written with experiences by the
author that could justify these claims
the way the book is written makes us
that we have to take the author's word
for what is said
without being able to verify by looking
at
other independent publications or events
that
also verify the claims now that being
said
there are people who have used this book
as a framework for understanding other
forms of oppression
so these works do exist and this
pedagogy is helpful for understanding
forms of oppression
i just again point this out because i
think it's important
to be critical of things that we even
agree with
otherwise we can end up following
without questioning
which again hence why i ask questions at
the end of each one of these podcast
episodes that unpack scholarship
okay now another thing that i've been
teasing for a while
and kind of talked about in some even
some of the interviews that i previously
done
is i'd argue that mandatory subject
areas such as computer science
is actually a form of oppression in
terms of forcing a narrative
that positions one reality over others
so as an example that i previously
mentioned standards and
encourage engagement through certain
sets of
concepts practices skills etc that are
related to computer science
however anytime you're creating any kind
of a standard you're going to have to
leave
some practices concepts etc out
so the kinds of engagement with computer
science that are not forwarded through
standards
may unintentionally be viewed as
unimportant that being said if we go
back to my original point
of mandatory subject areas the kind of
subject areas that are elective
are deemed as not important compared to
other areas that are quote the core
subject areas
if we keep diving down the road of
adding more core subject areas that are
mandated for everybody
that approach without adding more hours
to the school day is going to dilute
every other subject area in terms of how
far you can dive deep into
those other subjects so for example if
read and write and arithmetic are our
three main subject areas and then we add
in computer science that takes away from
time on
reading writing arithmetic which frankly
i'm okay with
but if we keep going down this path and
say okay well now pe or physical
education
is mandatory okay and now music is
mandatory and now art is mandatory and
foreign language is mandatory etc now we
have like
a dozen or so classes throughout the day
that are mandatory that are considered
core subjects
this then dilutes what we can actually
do with it and actually accomplish by
engaging in those subject areas
but again this is a form of oppression
because it forwards certain
ways of knowing and engaging in content
while also positioning others as
irrelevant
or not as important by making them
elective
now another larger thing that kept
popping up in my mind
while reading through this book was the
the notion of oppression of gender
in relation to stem tech computer
science fields etc
so on one hand there is a large
diversity issue going on
in stem tech computer science steam
in terms of it's mainly white and asian
males
who are engaging in a lot of those
professions
so we're trying to diversify it whether
it be based on gender
or race or sexuality or however you want
whatever demographic you want to
go with we're trying to balance things
out a little bit more
that's great i totally support this i
don't think it should be heavily swayed
in one direction or demographic more
than another that's just
a a little weird but i do question well
why
is that why is there this imbalance in
some demographics in some professions
and not in others
and when it comes to this lack of
representation within these fields
this can create some problems in terms
of creating silent forms of oppression
where it's saying these are the certain
kinds of people who
will be successful or can engage in
these kinds of careers
so that is a form of oppression and it
is
typically a silent one one of the things
that i
find interesting as a non-binary
individual is that we have
several cs organizations that are
dedicated to getting more women and
girls interested in computer science
we also have lots of publications and
presentations on this particular topic
but we don't have the same movement
or public outcry for elementary teachers
where more than 80 percent of elementary
teachers are women
and white so this is an example of
focusing on one form of dominance
in cs as a field while ignoring
others in elementary education as a
field
so my question is why is it unacceptable
that there are so
few women in stem cs tech etc
but we don't complain that there are so
few men in elementary education
so to me this is a selective view of
oppression that we
as a field need to actually reconcile
with we can't just go with the
dominative
narrative that we need to get more women
in cs
professions yeah i agree with you but if
we view that as a problem
then we also need to engage in a
conversation about the
demographic imbalances that exist within
educators in the field of education and
why do organizations that are trying to
help marginalize genders such as women
in some fields like stem steam cs tech
etc
why don't they also mention that gender
is not a binary and that there are
individuals who exist
outside of that false binary like myself
and other guests who have been on the
show okay so i'm going to end rant there
i hope you enjoyed this mini series on
paro freddy's book
pedagogy of the oppressed it is a dense
book if you're not used to reading that
kind of
content you've probably noticed from all
the quotes that i was reading
however it's the kind of book that i
highly recommend anyone read
if you want to learn more about
liberatory practices in education
and given everything that's been going
on in 2020 it seems like a lot of people
are wanting to learn about
these forms of pedagogy so i think this
is an excellent book to dive deeper into
hopefully this podcast serves as a
little introduction or teaser
that'll encourage you to read the book
stay tuned next week for another
interview and then
the following week for another unpacking
scholarship episode that will talk about
something other than
pedagogy of the oppressed i hope you
enjoyed this mini-series
and i hope you're having a wonderful and
safe week thank you so much for
listening
Chapter
Freire, P. (2000). Chapter 4. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed: 30th Anniversary Edition (Kindle, pp. 118–175). New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Short Summary of the Book
"This book will present some aspects of what the writer has termed the pedagogy of the oppressed, a pedagogy which must be forged with, not for, the oppressed (whether individuals or peoples) in the incessant struggle to regain their humanity. This pedagogy makes oppression and its causes objects of reflection by the oppressed, and from that reflection will come their necessary engagement in the struggle for their liberation. And in the struggle this pedagogy will be made and remade." (pp. 43-44).
Some Of My Lingering Questions/Thoughts
My biggest question that I've saved for the end is why doesn't the author provide more evidence to support these claims?
When are/n’t mandatory subjects or standards (e.g., CS) a form of oppression that positions or values one reality over others?
When we have imbalances among demographics within fields like CS, why don’t we also talk about the demographic imbalances within fields like education?
Resources/Links Relevant to This Episode
Other podcast episodes that were mentioned or are relevant to this episode
Culturally Responsive-sustaining Computer Science Education: A Framework
In this episode I unpack the Kapor Center’s (2021) publication titled “Culturally responsive-sustaining computer science education: A framework,” which describes multiple courses of action for six core components of culturally responsive-sustaining CS education.
Decolonizing Education through SEL and PBL with Matinga Ragatz
In this interview with Matinga Ragatz, we discuss Matinga’s journey into education, creating environments where kids can learn through struggle, the importance of social and emotional learning (SEL), how schools promote individualism and exceptionalism, the intersections of project-based learning and SEL, decolonizing education, the importance of shared values in education, and so much more.
How to Get Started with Computer Science Education
In this episode I provide a framework for how districts and educators can get started with computer science education for free.
Intersections of Cultural Capital with Kimberly Scott
In this interview with Kimberly Scott, we discuss some of the problems with discourse around grit, students as techno-social change agents, teaching with culturally responsive approaches in communities that are hostile toward culturally responsive pedagogies, unpacking discourse and Discourse, considering both present and future identities when teaching, potential disconnects between theory and practice with intersectional work, comforting the disturbed and disturbing the comforted, and so much more.
Liberatory Computing Education for African American Students
In this episode I unpack Walker, Sherif, and Breazeal’s (2022) publication titled “Liberatory computing education for African American students,” which unpacks and situates the five pillars of the liberation framework proposed by El-Amin within data activism modules.
Open Design for Learning with Aria Chernik
In this interview with Aria Chernik, we discuss student-centered engagement situated within authentic contexts, problems with focusing entirely on capitalistic purposes of education, using critical pedagogies to problematize power dynamics in the classroom, using an open design for learning, the phenomenology of collaboration, creating a space that encourages taking risks in education, and much more.
Pedagogy of the Oppressed
This episode is the start of a miniseries that unpacks Paulo Freire’s (1970) book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” This particular episode unpacks chapter 1, which discusses how oppressors maintain control over the oppressed. Following unpacking scholarship episodes discuss what this looks like in education and how educators can adopt a “pedagogy of the oppressed” to break cycles of oppression.
This episode is episode two of a miniseries that unpacks Paulo Freire’s (1970) book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” This particular episode unpacks chapter 2, which discusses the “banking” approach to education that assumes students are repositories of information, and then proposes a liberatory approach to education that focuses on posing problems that students and teachers collaboratively solve. If you haven’t listened to the discussion on the first chapter, click here.
This episode is episode three of a miniseries that unpacks Paulo Freire’s (1970) book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” This particular episode unpacks chapter 3, which discusses the importance of dialogue when engaging in liberatory practices. This episode builds off the previous unpacking scholarship episodes on chapter one and chapter two, so make sure you listen to those episodes before jumping in here.
This episode is the final episode of a miniseries that unpacks Paulo Freire’s (1970) book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” This particular episode unpacks chapter 4, which synthesizes the concepts introduced in the previous chapters and discusses the difference between anti-dialogical and dialogical practices in education (and at large). This episode builds off the previous unpacking scholarship episodes on chapter one, chapter two, and chapter three so make sure you listen to those episodes before jumping in here.
Racial Justice Amidst the Dangers of Computing Creep: A Dialogue
In this episode I unpack Shah and Yadav’s (2023) publication titled “Racial justice amidst the dangers of computer creep: A dialogue,” which presents a dialogue that problematizes issues around racial justice in computing education.
In this episode I unpack Kallia and Cutts’ (2021) publication titled “Re-examining inequalities in computer science participation from a Bourdieusian sociological perspective,” which uses Bourdieu’s discussions of capital, habitus, and field to analyze 147 publications on CS interventions.
The Shire as Metaphor for Systemic Racism with Joyce McCall
In this interview with Joyce McCall, we unpack and problematize some of the issues around race and racism in relation to education. In particular, we discuss the importance of allies not only showing up to support marginalized or oppressed groups, but staying when conversations get uncomfortable; the Shire from the Lord of the Rings as a metaphor for hegemony and systemic racism; as well as a variety of theories such as critical race theory, double consciousness, cultural capital; and much more.
In this episode I unpack Coppola’s (2021) publication titled “What if Freire had Facebook? A critical interrogation of social media woke culture among privileged voices in music education discourse,” which summarizes Paulo Freire’s works and hypothesizes how Freire may have responded to some forms of woke culture.
Learn more about critical pedagogy by checking out resources by the Freire Institute
Demographic data I was referencing that indicates 89% of elementary teachers in 2017-18 were female
Note, there are also huge imbalances among race/ethnicity that we should also problematize within education
Find other CS educators and resources by using the #CSK8 hashtag on Twitter
Free CS Resources I Have Created
More Content
