Intersectionality of Critical Pedagogy and Post-Modernism
In his explanatory framework on diversity and the myth of opportunity gap, H. Richard Milner IV, points to, The Myth of Meritocracy as one of five interconnected areas he believes are critical in bridging and shedding light on opportunity gaps (2010, p. 13). As Milner states, this myth is when, “Educators believe that student success is consequence and result of merit–that is, students (and people in general) deserve their success and failure in school and society because they have earned them” (p. 15). Furthermore, many educators proliferate the belief people will be rewarded and reach their full potential based on their own merits and hard work. “Educators can fail to recognize the systemic barriers and institutional structures that prevent opportunity and thereby hinder success” (Milner, p. 30). Thus, the challenge for educators and people alike, is to become mindful of the many factors that go beyond merit that influence and shape a students’ academic and social successes.
When addressing The Myth of Meritocracy, Milner illustrates that there are three mindsets that accompany the continuous belief of this myth; that all people are born with the same opportunities, students success is based on their effort, and that some students just do not have the aptitude, ability, or skills to succeed (p. 30). Milner draws the connection between educational opportunity and economic realities, and the difficulties and complexities educators endure to understand them. This is especially problematic since this understanding goes against the “American Dream”, the idealized notion that one can simply pull themselves up by their boot straps and “transcend poverty” (p. 31).
The Myth of Meritocracy is built on the “privileged” ideologies of the wealthy. These privileged students often inherit material, physical, social and cultural capital. One way to combat these mainstream systemic dogmas is by Critical Pedagogy. Since the late 1970s, Seehwa Cho (2013) points out that critical theories began moving away from dominant philosophies and theories Marxism, Modernism and Structural (p. 28). As Cho states, “this was the rise of the post-theories: poststructuralism, postmodernism, and post colonialism” (p. 29). In her book, Graphic Design Theory, Meredith Davis describes Post-Modernism as a “combination of modernist techniques and styles, with something more sympathetic to the viewer” (p. 190). Davis attributes these blurred origins to the fact that late-modernism and postmodernism both arose from post-industrialism. Furthermore, Postmodernism broke from high-culture and universality of modernism, “aesthetics preferred by white, mostly European, progressive intellectuals” (Davis, p. 190). Post-Modernism makes no claims to absolute truths or the nature of truth itself. Instead, it calls into question beliefs and foundations of the social institutions that maintain them.
The brake of postmodernism allowed Critical Pedagogy to emerge and stood in “opposition of mainstream education paradigm” (Cho, p. 15). Critical pedagogy and critical education theories reject two major premises of mainstream education paradigm: first, challenges the idea the school is the “great equalizer” (Cho, p. 16) which furthers the “myth of meritocracy”, and the second is instrumental reasoning that sees schooling as a means to an end, “the end being profits” (Cho, p. 18). In reference to Paulo Freire’s influential book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1968), Cho presents two important questions relevant to today’s critical pedagogues: “why did critical pedagogy turn to Freire, and what influences did Freire have on shaping the identity and projects of critical pedagogy?” (p. 24). Freire offered the elements of hope and possibility, “he focused not only on deconstruction, but also on (re)construction” (Cho, p. 24). Furthermore, Freire’s positions are centered on the “transformation of individuals and critical consciousness, acceptance of oppression and hope that reality can be changed for the better” (Cho, 24).
When you pull back the idealized notions for what they really are, educators are then better equipped to approach the system with a more individualized mindset, capable of providing goals that understand the economic circumstance in their community and classroom. Make sure our schools, public and private resemble the closest thing to meritocracy. Critical pedagogy was not exempt from these influenced and shaped by this wave of change. One key influence of postmodernism on critical pedagogy is multiple marginalities (Cho, 29). In order to alter the status quo, educators must shrug the mythos that contain them to unrealistic standards of both the educational system and the economic gaps they wish to influence.
References:
Cho, S. (2012). Critical Pedagogy and Social Change: Critical Analysis on the Language of Possibility. New York, NY: Routledge. Chapter 2: The Historical Context: The Origin of Critical Pedagogy, pp. 14–38.
Davis, M. (2012). Graphic Design in Context: Graphic Design Theory. New York, NY: Thames & Hudson. Chapter 6: Post-Modernism: Reading the World as Text, pp. 174–205.
Milner, H.R. (2010). Start Where You Are But Don’t Stay There: Understanding Diversity,
Opportunity Gaps, and Teaching in Today’s Classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Chapter 1: A Diversity and Opportunity Gaps Explanatory Framework, pp. 13–44.
