In thinking about my theoretical framework, I find myself wondering about how and when it will all come together. I remember the “aha” moment when I first understood that my academic interests were in fact valid areas of research. Reading Freire was enlightening - education made human! Furthermore, finding out that people were using Freire’s ideas to guide and conduct research, inspired me. Since that first semester in the doctoral program I have known that “Critical Pedagogy” is the set of lenses that I want to use in my research. However, when considering a theory as a researcher, one also has to think about the methodologies that are aligned with the core principles of the theory. Herein lies one of my biggest hurdles, how align my desire to use critical pedagogy with the years of training in the “hard sciences”.
During my years as an undergraduate and graduate student, I was indoctrinated into viewing the world in a positivist way: the world can be known and the laws of the universe cannot be broken. These believes were contradictory to the fact that I knew, felt, and suffered from an unjust society that often reminded me that I (being an ugly, short, hairy and smelly Latino) was overstepping my role in the social ladder. I rarely paid attention to this discordance between science and society since I was taught that science is value-free.
However, I now know better! I want to explore how science instead of being an extension of the oppression of some people, can be a tool for empowerment. However, with my own limitations and habits of mind, I have tried to design an experiment (as scientists tend to do) rather than using the tools normally associated with critical theory (such as qualitative interviews).
So I find myself trying to accommodate my old habits of mind and my new understandings of how the human world works, and the hundreds of readings I have completed have built an arsenal of theories - but I have not yet figured out how to make them gel! It has to happen, but I wonder how and when this will happen!
By December of 2015 I already had some inclinations towards critical theory - even before I had a
name for it. In fact, the following passage from the “What is education?” paper, already included some components of a critical analysis of the state of education in the United States. I wrote:
“Political discourse over the last few decades has blamed education for underpreparing the working force in our country. The National Commission on Excellence in Education (NCEE) published a powerful report in 1983 titled: A Nation At Risk. This report’s goal was to improve the workforce by “raising standards,” but this goal was not based on any data that correlated school achievement and the strength of the economy. The insidious results have not been the improved educational outcomes that afford all students access to great education. Instead the consequences are the increasing demonizing of public school faculty and administration, an increased reliance on standardized testing, and the partial and growing privatization of educational endeavors. The policies that ensued after A Nation At Risk use a narrative that exploits the results of social inequalities in order to create a sense of panic and discombobulation. They also
have in common a narrow view of the problems that public education faces. Many of the ideas about our “failing” school system are based on misinterpretations of data which do not take into account the complexities of the problems that affect our schools (Ravitch, 2014).”
After a more critical analysis using critical social theory, I now believe that a deeper exploration of the intent and purpose of public education should be considered. This is my updated version:
“Public education serves the purpose of ensuring the recycling of social classes. In the United States most people from the upper classes do not educate their children in public schools - and even those that do, ensure that their public schools are favored in every way. Public schools are therefore, instruments of induction and discipline for the poorer people in this country. In this way, educational policies that may appeal to our common sense (with their token statements and misleading titles like “No Child Left Behind”), are extensions of a classists ideology that benefits from social reproduction. For example, the scandalous language used by the “A Nation At Risk” report from 1983, is just one powerful strategy
used by the free market to push its agenda. As if the only purpose of education was to create a group of employees, education was attacked and in response, disciplined by legislature. In turn, the resulting laws and systematic programs use criteria that hides the invidious nature of neoliberalism and make a deflated attempt to address the symptoms of social inequity rather than the causes.”
When I first began the doctoral program I had no idea that those issues and ideas that had been ruminating in my head, were valid areas for research.I had anecdotally seen the power of teaching science in a liberatory way - students were asking revelatory questions about the world, and
ultimately about their place in the world. With that in mind, I read researchers’ theories and methodologies but I could not find a true fit with my own ideas. Luckily, this last semester I came across Dr. Daniel Morales-Doyle (University of Illinois at Chicago) and his theory of “Justice-centered science pedagogy.”
Justice-centered science pedagogy (JCSP) is a theoretical framework aimed at addressing the social oppressive system. This framework combines ideas of traditions of critical pedagogy and culturally relevant pedagogy in order have students not only achieve academically but more importantly to position themselves as transformative intellectuals [thinking about science and social justice issues].
In order to science education to be a conduit for social transformation, it must be anti-oppressive and empowering. In this way, the two main tenets of JCSP are:
Culturally relevant pedagogy: this is Dr. Gloria Ladson-Billings description of the work of effective teachers of African American students. Ladson-Billings (1995) defines culturally relevant pedagogy as “rest[ing] on three criteria or propositions: (a) students must experience academic success, (b) students must develop and/or maintain cultural competence, and (c) students must develop a critical consciousness through which they challenge the status quo of the current social order” (p. 160).
Critical Pedagogy: Paulo Freire describes the goal of education as culminating in Conscientização - the process by which people come to understand themselves as capable of improving their reality by disposing of oppression. In this way, people must become aware of the historical and political conditions that created the present inequitable social circumstances. Freire believed that education can be a tool of oppression if it is done as the simple transmission of knowledge selected by the teacher [ banking style of education, that focuses on technical skills associated with economic development]. On the other hand, education can be liberating as long as people by increase their praxis, “the action and reflection of men and women upon their world in order to transform it” (Freire, 1970/2001, p.79).
For Morales-Doyle, JCSP has as the ultimate goal to create “transformative intellectuals” by having students learn about, understand, and work with social justice science issues. Students must see themselves as capable of leading social transformation and teachers must see these students as the people who can help us imagine alternate mechanisms for social change.
Freire, P. (2001). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum. (Originally published in 1970)
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that's just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543675
(a) In her 2011 article, Dr. Cindi Katz presents an interesting and thought-provoking theory for analyzing the current trends and causes of social injustices. Katz uses powerful and targeted language to make her points. For example, terms like “symptomatic silences”, “naturalized struggles”, “braided class”, “disposable futures”, “cannibalizing labor”, and “thick bloody integument” are all indicative of the visceral response she targets in her readers.
Katz’ theory of unjust social reproduction describes three major components:
1) Neoliberal capitalism and its overaccumulation crisis. Within this constituent, Katz focuses on how responsibility has shifted from the state to the individual, which enables blame for poverty to be designated to the “self-sufficient self.” Furthermore, dispossession (which leads to social reproduction) is accomplished via privatizing common resources.
2) Childhood as spectacle, is the term that Katz uses to explain that under the neoliberal agenda, childhood is seen as “a commodity, as ornament and as waste.” In this sense, children have little value in their present state.
3) Children as waste. There are several ways in which children are wasted: school to prison pipeline, the militarization of youth, and extremely/debilitating labor.
To me, the most significant and eye-opening component of Katz’ theory is the explicit connection between children’s play time and the potential change of society. Since children play in ways which are imaginative and therefore question world structures, there are opportunities for children (which eventually will grow up) to recognize that ALL social constructs are also made up and flexible. She writes: “Playing at something has a fugitive or fleeting aspect that can spark a recognition that even the original is made up - a performance - and might be made different.” Lastly, I find myself in complete agreement with her theoretical lens through which childhood with its “revolutionary imagination” is a pivotal time of promise rather than its current appreciation as waste.
(b) As a researcher, I am interested in science education as a conduit for social justice. When Katz describes children’s play as an avenue for rethinking social constructs (and therefore, reality for humans) I see a parallel with science education which holds true potential for changing students’ ideas about our world. In thinking about the significance of challenging social constructs by using science, I am reminded of Carl Sagan when he wrote: “Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact.” As well as Neil Degrasse Tyson when he said: “a scientist is just a kid who never grew up.” Both of them capture the essence of curiosity and wonder - both essential components of playing. Analyzing the ways in which Katz’ ideas connect with my research interests, I can connect the wasted potential of my students with the social reproduction of classes. Science with its specialized language and demands for submission while learning it, is usually oppressive to the type of students I serve. On the other hand, if students can appreciate that scientific knowledge is not culminating, but instead ongoing and dynamic, then students can begin to see that they too can utilize its approaches to not only understand the natural world, but also the social constructs which dictate much of our daily lives.
Lastly, Katz warning about wasted childhoods: "We are all in this together and the loss of anyone's creativity or creative potential is a tragedy of the commons, a loss to our common future." is a reminder that we don’t need women and minorities in the sciences just because it is politically correct, but more importantly, we need them because they have a different experiential filter which will see problems and solutions that are out of the reach of those people (wealthy white men) who traditionally have had access to science.
Here is Dr. Tyson addressing women in science:
Lastly, just for fun: Racism in schools:
Thursday, May 31, 2018
Kathleen Nolan’s chapter from Theory and Educational Research:
Critical social theories Kathleen uses
In order to conduct her study and make sense of the data, Nolan used several theories. These theories include:
Reproduction theory: social and economic classes are reproduced by conditions that favor the status quo. This social reproduction is ensured by policies, structures and ideologies that ensured the current power structures. Moreover, schools play a pivotal role in maintaining these roles by having educational experiences that are different for poor/minority (urban) students.
Social Theories of Punishment: economic, political, ideological and cultural forces shape the ways in which the criminal justice system sees and applies punishment. In order to maintain the current power structures there are forces outside of the criminal justice system that shape its policies and implementations. In our country and in the current time these forces can be clearly felt by the mass imprisonment (weighing heavily on man of color) and the “order-maintenance” policing.
Acts of resistance (oppositional behaviors): oppressed people feel the power of the oppressor in many ways and they often feel disempowered. Some ways of dealing with the burden of the oppression is to create spaces/times for resistance. This resistance can come from a place of despair, where the oppressed person wield their individual power in ways to can be interpreted as disrespectful and criminal.
Theory of change: the current systems and structures in our society are unfair and benefit some groups over others. However, these systems are too large and cumbersome to change, so instead of focusing on the larger social constructs, some people focus on the individuals. In this way, individuals can be helped to fit into the broken system rather than fixing the oppressive system.
How/why does she make the theoretical decisions that she does? With what effects on her project and herself as a researcher and writer? (1 paragraph)At the end of the her chapter, Nolan describes her experience visiting an African Marker - with all the colors, smells, sounds - overwhelming. However, in her writing (and by extension in her thinking) Nolan never strays from utilizing theory to inform her ideas and data analysis. She skillfully uses those theories (and specific parts of said theories) to guide every aspect of this work including the interpretation of the data. Moreover, she also is flexible enough to only use components of these theories that best provide explanatory power to her data. Nolan explores the immediate/individual data and then looks exogenously at the context. Her selection and usage of theories exemplifies the concept of finding the threat that connects all parts of her project together. As a reader, I found myself at awe of this work and inspire to improve the social conditions that resulted in such oppressive results for her participants (and their communities).
What are some key takeaways for you? (1 paragraph)Nolan’s chapter is full of insights and these in turn illuminate her research endeavor, as well as her interpretation of her results. In many ways, I am currently feeling the pains of reading many theories and then struggling to figure out how all these ideas fit into my own research interests. Nolan weaves together many theories and her work is richer because of the lenses she uses - but more importantly, her work still maintains cohesiveness and coherence. This is a remarkable piece of work that had lofty goals and complex characteristics. Nolan manages to bring forth ideas without overwhelming the reader nor disruption the flow of the narrative. She masterfully uses theories to guide and validate her own ideas - and all the while she produces text that maintains internal consistency. It is obvious that she is extremely knowledgeable (she had a powerful theoretical arsenal) and also reflective about the process and the interpretation of the data. I am impressed with her work and hope that I can follow in her footsteps.
Kathleen Nolan’s dissertation proposal
Kathleen Nolan’s proposal, “Disciplining Urban Youth: An ethnographic study of the relationship between schools and prisons”, is clearly written with lots of passion, knowledge, and purposeful intent. Her description of the proposed research stirred strong responses from me and left me thinking about the importance and immense need for critical social research. Nolan provides the readers (reviewers) with a rich description of the problem (negative educational experiences that may lead minority students into jail), the reasoning/background for the framework (the pressures and contingencies that act upon students of color), the logic for the methodology selection (ethnographic inquiry), and the significance of the proposed work (not just describing the patterns of problems, but also providing hope).
In order to best describe the strong connection between the different sections of her proposal, in the following paragraphs I will describe each one separately and address the consistent undertone throughout the proposal.
Goals
Nolan begins her proposal by describing her time as a public high school teacher in NYC. In her introductory section she raises questions about equity, “why are some urban schools not getting the resources they desperately need?” and the connection between schools and the criminal justice [or injustice] system, “Why are some schools becoming more like prisons than perhaps ever before?” In this way, Nolan sets up the argument that individual cases of students entering the criminal justice system are the result of a greater pattern of oppression that is consistent and observable. The purpose of her proposed research project becomes clear as she makes the case that the resulting structures (i.e. police presence in some schools) is directly connected to the ideology that sees urban youth (mostly minorities) as dangerous and requiring suppression. As Anyon (2009) suggested, this approach enables Nolan to explore the problem of the disproportionate number of minority youth in jail by looking “exogenously”. In other words, Nolan is interested in the students that end up in jail, as much as she is also interested in the environmental contingencies that “produce a flow of certain students into the criminal justice system.”
Research questions
Nolan’s questions are ambitious and powerful. Without having to directly pointing to it, Nolan asks questions that target the purpose, ideology, and legitimacy of the school discipline procedures, as these demonstrate the interconnection between racists, elitists and classist people (legislatures) and structures. Nolan is not shy about calling out the historical events that have lead to the current situation. While at the same time, she calls for an exploration of the “lived experience” of the youth that is currently suffering the consequences and results of a system that is not truly fair. Lastly, Nolan does not excuse violent behavior, but instead proposes that these behaviors are not random, but instead these acts may be influenced by the unjust historical context.
Literature review
Nolan situates her work in three main literature themes: a. Critical educational studies, b. Changing role of urban public schools, and c. Repressive (disciplining) elements of schools.
Nolan explores these three main bodies of literature and shows that they are connected and interrelated. With these literature themes, Nolan exposes and clarifies her framework, even if she does not isolate it nor directly name it. In order to position her work within the larger historical and social context, Nolan describes several important and connected areas of research including: mass incarceration and its consequences of urban communities, the political and economic roots of mass incarceration, theories of punishment, urban youth violence, policies and public rhetoric, and finally, the connection between urban youth violence, schooling and punishment. Throughout Nolan’s presentation of the literature, one of the most pertinent and present connectors is the neo-liberal policies and ideals which use the criminal justice system as a legal (and often seen as moral) method for controlling poor people.
Methodology
In her proposal, Nolan makes a strong case for her methodology selection. Ethnography as a inquiry method enables her to describe the immediate events in her participants’ (guides) lives. But more importantly, it also allows her to explore, describe, and situate those events to a larger historical and social context. Nolan describes how she plans on extending her research work in order to connect the micro (individual cases of students and the criminal justice system) and the macro (social structures and history). Lastly, it is also important to point out that Nolan has set out to do research FOR social justice. There is no doubt that Nolan is a committed researcher who not only wants to understand what and why it is happening, but also wants to improve the lives of those she studies.
Methods
Since Nolan is using an extended ethnographic approach her choice of school, participants, interviewing protocols, selection of historical analysis and case studies, all speak about a theoretical framework which values the interconnectedness of the individuals and the greater context. Nolan also describes the fact that the proposed work builds on the work of many others that have already explored and exposed the connection between school experiences and the criminal justice system. Lastly, the inclusion of the neighborhood data and the following of the students involved in disciplinary cases, is an addition to the body of literature which will surely enrich the exposition of the connection between schools and jails.
Analysis
Like the rest of her proposal, Nolan’s analysis section describes the importance of connecting themes and exploring the larger with the minute. Moreover, even with the described approach to analysis Nolan doesn’t want limit herself by selecting a single analysis approach, instead she describes that this will be an ongoing process which will incorporate existing theories, data collection and data analysis. Nolan concludes her proposal by describing the potential significance of this work. She hopes that the analysis of the lived experience of these youth involved with the criminal justice system will eventually guide policy makers, and also point to possibility of change and hope.
Conclusion
Nolan’s proposal is overwhelming to me! She is proposing to take on a very challenging problem and she specifies large and complex data sources. Nolan’s approach is commendable, but I don’t know how she will accomplish all she proposes during her time as a doctoral student (this seems more like the work of a lifetime). She is clearly interested in social justice and her writing screams about the system that both punishes and perpetuates the causes of crime. From her perspective, oppression is alive and well - underhandedly holding some down because of their circumstances.
Lastly, given the large scope of Nolan’s proposal, I wondered about the approval of her pilot as well as this current proposal. Since she posits that the individual is affected by the larger social structures, she plans on including an expansive set of data points. Some of these data sources will be sensitive in nature (e.g. personal histories with suspensions and the criminal justice system). Undoubtedly, this work is invaluable and needed, and I am glad she is willing to do all this difficult work including the submission for approval of this proposal. Nolan is inspiring!
How does critical social theory help her design a cohesive, coherent, rich, and important project? Be specific. (1-2 paragraphs)
Nolan’s proposal is a powerful demonstration that research is needed in order to expose the injustices our society perpetuates. Under Nolan’s lenses, what can seemingly be viewed as an easy explanation for the disciplinary actions of schools, can in fact be explored and connected to the larger social and cultural oppression of young minority boys. After reading Nolan’s proposal it is easy to feel uncomfortable with the status quo. In many ways, Nolan uses critical social theory to expose the unfair ideologies, structures and policies which oppress urban youth. For example, by exploring the historical changes that have taken place over the last decades (i.e. depletion of vital economic resources and opportunities through deindustrialization), Nolan exposes the underlying currents that have led to new patterns of mass incarceration. Also, Nolan describes the dismissive description of minority youth as predators, which leaves out the social, political, and economic forces that are at play for these youth, and result in punishment which benefit the middle and upper classes.
It is obvious to me that Nolan is vested in this work and her description of her participants, as well as the environmental variables indicate to me that she is positioning herself as an ethnographer and an agent for change. This work is extremely important and Nolan’s exposure of the limiting reality of the meritocracy ideas of society, enabled me as a reader to feel that discomfort with things as they are.
However, I now know better! I want to explore how science instead of being an extension of the oppression of some people, can be a tool for empowerment. However, with my own limitations and habits of mind, I have tried to design an experiment (as scientists tend to do) rather than using the tools normally associated with critical theory (such as qualitative interviews). 
