The pedagogic theories as for the basic essence of achieving sustainability of education - Research Paper Example

Abstract Pedagogy is the professional and preparatory mode of delivering teaching to educators and through proper instructions. There are several theories concerning the interpretation of pedagogy in educative circles. Various theorists have detailed cohesive reports on the efficiency of pedagogies in attaining the overall mandate of ensuring successful teaching practices. Some of the included theorists are Paulo Freire, Peter McLaren, Joseph Jacotot and Benjamin Bloom, among others. Some of the methods to be discussed are effective in teaching students and the gaining of new knowledge. However, some of them are not ordinary teaching methods and they incorporate different strategies to enhance learning. There has been a confrontational relation between paradigm and pedagogy. Two categories of paradigm enhance the affiliation: zero-paradigm and critical paradigm. Basically, the ‘zero’ paradigm describes conventional teaching approaches while ‘critical’ paradigm describes the sanctioning loom to pedagogy. These paradigms are important in learning process, but critical paradigm is the key paradigm. This is because it empowers education to learners. Therefore, pedagogical theories work at empowering the literacy level of learners through assistance of the educators, formal and informal. They have also presented dominant cultures of education and also encompass initiatives of promoting learning technologies in support of pedagogy. This paper discusses four theories to assist in explanation and approval of these facts. Keywords: paradigm, theory, education, learners, educators My Pedagogy Creed Introduction Development of education has made pedagogy a matter of public policy and for prescription of official matters. According to writings on ‘Essays on Pedagogy’ people need to comprehend views of education and be able to engage them accordingly. (Alexander & Alexander, 2008, p.212) My pedagogy asserts that pedagogy is not the normal teaching or mode of instruction in learning experience. Development of a pedagogy creed paves way for encompassing performances of teaching incorporated with beliefs, strategies, theories and debates that mould and form it. Pedagogy connects the apparently self-contained act of teaching with culture, structure and mechanisms of social control (Hall et al, 2008, p 3). There has been a confrontational relation between paradigm and pedagogy. Two categories of paradigm enhance the affiliation: zero-paradigm and critical paradigm. The ‘zero’ describes conventional teaching approaches while ‘critical’ describes the sanctioning loom to pedagogy. The critical paradigm is the key paradigm in empowering education to learners. Informed by educators such as Dewey and Freire, the critical paradigm recognizes participation as a necessary condition for empowering education (Mulcahy, 2010, p 60). Some of the theories discussed below will assist in developing personal pedagogic creed. I have engaged in making my own pedagogy creed that invokes the ideas of some theorists, whose contributing information describes my idealistic creed as discussed below. Theory 1 Paulo discusses his theory of ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’ addressing contagious issues to learners a little deprived of freedom. It follows the Marxist theoretic analysis of education. The oppressed in this context are psychologically or mentally suppressed. They include individuals physically challenged or in good physique condition but undermined a specific aspect of their life. The theory discusses the psychological point of view of the oppressed learners. He asserts that the theory contains two phases. The oppressed through their practices reveal out the world they survive in as brought out in the first stage of transformation. The second stage changes the pedagogy of the oppressed to pedagogy of all men. This process liberates the permanency of the pedagogy. Dominance of culture is the most reflected action being confronted by the said pedagogy of the oppressed. (Spring, 2006, p. 134) His theory argues that formal education should be turned to in an equal way as the formal education to ensure same educational practices to the oppressed and their opposite counterparts. The mode of instruction provided to the oppressed should entail a lot of dialogue. It is more conversational since no particular protocol of curriculum is followed or eventually assessed. Too much education, Paulo Freire argues, involves ‘banking’ – the educator making ‘deposits’ in the learner (Smith, 1997, p 78), hence making the educative process an involvement of both parties, educators and learners. This theory is a learning theory that points out the humanistic point of a learner’s life. A facet of the theory states that the destiny of a human gets solved through the struggle that lies between the social classes of the well-off and the less privileged. According to Paulo, he has never abandoned his position with respect to class analysis as theorized in this theory (Freire, 2000, p 15). The class analysis of the oppressed has been faced with many issues that Freire addressed. In essences, Freire’s later works make it clear that what is important is to approach the analysis of oppression through a convergent theoretical framework where the object of oppression is cut across by such factors as race, class, gender, culture, language and ethnicity (Freire, 2000, p15). The theory links to day-to-day experiences. There are many learners undergoing the education process informally, especially in areas with limited technological advancement. There has been an urgent need for educators of informal education to practice their notions. Though discrimination of the educators and their learners, I have seen them struggle to get the adequate level of literacy required. Paulo says that incorporation of teaching and learning issues has been fitted into place with how they interlink. Respect is considered to be a two-way thing while engaging informal education among the oppressed. There is also a transcending division between the teachers and learners with their engagement with the teaching process. This is due to the sacrifices the learners make and the magnificent experience portrayed by the educators. The theory presents sensible strengths alongside weaknesses. One of the strongest assertions of Paulo’s theory is that it provides a counter-balance for championing for informal action while opting for necessity of the oppressed pedagogy. It also defines proper ground for judgmental social classes and their less vitality. On the other hand, theory depicts certain flaws. The language used by Paulo confers to demonstrate concerns involving mystery. He also works on his theory using a conversational framework which limits his ideas and insights from a personal point of view. Simplistic analyses are also drawn from the theory enhancing less clarification or not on the support of the oppressed individuals. This theory also adds up to involvement of smuggled values and insights under problem-solving of the pedagogy of the oppressed. Paulo Freire was distorting his findings by explaining them with an idealist theory of human development that neglected the importance of social conditions and learning (Loughran, 2006, p 135). Theory 2 The second theory in pedagogy is the ‘pedagogy of revolution’ by Peter McLaren. The theory promotes radical work undertaken in the literacy of teaching. His educational theory mainly centers on critical pedagogy. The pedagogy entrusts itself in various modes of learning been undertaken in cohesion with many subsidiary and marginalized groups. It also concentrates on the future of education by undergoing revolutionary changes. McLaren interprets the theory of revolution through a Marxists lens. Revolutionary critical pedagogy is multifaceted in that it brings a Marxist humanist perspective to a wide range of policy and curriculum issues (McLaren & Kincheloe, 2007, p 312). It maintains freedom of human beings from inevitability. For the achievement of this to take effect, there has to be many paths leading to a goal requiring sole participation of teachers whose main role is to transform social interactions of education production. It is a more behaviorist learning theory since McLaren calls out to educators to become morally and ethically upright to aid in thrashing out struggles against oppression of people socially. It focuses primarily on a discourse that stresses the overwhelming logic of domination or the failure of teachers to act in the face of domination (Giroux, 2000, p 205). The theory puts into light radical pedagogy. Interests in the living society are represented by law and religion among other vital sectors of life. The conceptual core of radical scholarship over the last decade has been strongly influenced by the rediscovery of Marx and has involved unpacking the submerged connections between schooling and the economic sphere of capitalist production (McLaren, 1995, p 37). From a personal point of view, I have experienced teachers portraying struggle in curbing democracy. Reason behind it is due to the respect for values pertaining and the appeal made to moral opinions and criticality in thinking and reasoning. For the students, the theory has put emphasis on personal learner subjectivity. The pedagogy is considered as an expression of radical social hypothesis. Ways in which I have seen integration of negotiations of teachers and students have been affected by this theory. Difference in position, language and culture makes this possible. Students also question the creation of their radical history and also debate the surrounding social class. Insights from McLaren’s theory provide imminent of the teaching process by encouraging teachers to participate in the revolutionary struggle that takes place in classes. McLaren uses this theory to sensitize teachers to come up with exemplary strategies that are required to be used in classes. The educators and their corresponding learners engage in combined efforts in fighting the struggle concerning oppression witnessed in the teaching and learning process. McLaren assists educators to engage more profoundly with the current crisis of global capitalism, in order to construct a renewed socialist project for the new millennium (McLaren, 2000, p i). Some of the strengths posed by the critical pedagogy used in McLaren’s theory bring into lights many issues that affect most Australian schools. Critical pedagogy is steeped in a posture on moral indignation toward the injustices reproduced in many public schools (McLaren, 1995, p 92). However, he makes it to make advancement on thematic issues of socio-economic and neo-liberal policies and increasing the growth of class schism and inequality through the ‘Rock’n’Roll’ policy of critical pedagogy. (Giroux & McLaren, 2005 p.223) The theoretical aspect of McLaren has not yet been adopted in many schools due to the uncertainty of its aspects. It is not known if it could promote democracy in schools and continue progress in teaching practices. It has also been hard for his theory to convince teachers, especially those in the urban centers to clinch the ‘pedagogy of revolution’. Bolstered by certain strands of feminist theory and postmodernist social theory, critical pedagogy continues to challenge the often uncontested relationship between school and society (McLaren, 1995, p 32). According to McLaren’s revolutionary theory, educators mislead vital concepts such as those of freedom to the learners. McLaren’s theory deepens the understanding of a learner by adding in-depth criticality while sharing interests in concerns surrounding revolutionary issues. It also makes a learner understand intellectually that schooling is a productive process and not isolative. A learner also gains radical knowledge in critically analyzing interests in cultural politics and status quo of social classes of different people hence making critical pedagogy develop multicultural works. (Albright & Luke, 2008, p.79) Theory 3 This theory of ‘emancipators pedagogy of the eccentric’ by Joseph Jacotot has been extensively used in the development of a pedagogy creed. As a theorist, Joseph taught by freeing his audience from the control of any external restrictions. He reaches this objective by employing explication and emancipation. In his theory, he challenges the dominant notions of the nature of teaching and learning by exploring the emancipators pedagogy of the eccentric (Hewlett, 2010, p 93). He asserts a strong belief perceiving that human beings possess equal intellectual levels; the differences arising from educational acquirement mostly come from different chances and experiences. He offers an explanation on his theory that there exists interdisciplinarity which is often associated with a constructive engaging the pedagogy. (Jones et al, 2010, p.27) Joseph’s theory has explicitly shown to be a learning theory portraying humanistic qualities. He highlights the role of intelligence and will between the scholars and their teachers. He depicts that all humans, despite differences in position, have the same level of intelligence. He raised the banner of intellectual emancipation and proclaimed, in the face of academicians and progressive educators, that everyone could learn on his own and without a master, and even teach someone else about which one was ignorant him/herself (Ranciere & Parker, 2004, p 222). Joseph discusses an aspect of revolution pedagogy from a comparative degree. The comparisons of intelligence between the educators and the learners are analyzed from this point of view. Eventually he concludes that intellectual levels among human beings are the same. These intellectuals are motivated by a concern for social ties and for affiliation (Simons & Masschelein, 2011, p 43). The comparison is promptly driven by sense of historical responsibility. Humans are triggered by the will they have. Evidently, if a learner has the will to achieve success in academics, he or she will pursue that path. Whether the will is positive or negative, humans still have the power to manipulate the will. An interesting peek at this is that learners leave their family and enter school to allow them to get exposed to any academic material in order to fit into the school time. It is also evident that many lecturers and professors around Australia and its environs, care less in giving explanations or instructions to their students. The students, therefore, have to take initiative and develop on their own to follow course and interpret the literatures taught. With the integration of teaching and learning process, intelligence of the teacher and learner is colligated most of all. This is seen by way in which students don’t question the teachers’ intelligence; instead, they strictly follow up what they are guided on. Emancipation of teachers to the learners encourages an effective engagement process. From this point, the regarded emancipation is always an individual act, the assertion and subsequent verification in experience of intellectual quality (Kritzman & Reilly, 2007, p 642). Jacotot’s experiment had caused a rupture with the logic of all pedagogies that share at least one thing: the assumption that the goal of the pedagogical act is to suppress the distance between the (superior) intelligence of the master and the (inferior) intelligence of the student (Simons & Masschelein, 2011, p 17). Joseph’s theory enlightens on the level of ignorance showed by people; learners, educators, literate and illiterate parents of the learners. He construes that all people have the same level of intellectual ability. He also showcases that teachers are bestowed the ability to fight inequality in learning institutions. Nevertheless, Jacotot communication does not transmit the contents of knowledge; it fictionalizes the experience of one’s thoughts and emotions, while inviting others to do the same (Tanke, 2011, p 88). Provision of the truth of Joseph’s theory is not certainly asserted. This theory has faced critical criticism and showing that theorist Joseph does not qualify to be an advocate championing for existing student-centered praxis. An in-depth insight of this theory encourages the learners to develop and utilize their own learning methods. They also learn to be independent in carrying out their academic researches without supervision of their educators. Theory 4 The theory of ‘Taxonomic Pedagogy’ by Benjamin Bloom develops a relationship realm in the course of educational history. It explains the taxonomic modes of learning. He also recognized that the importance of education is how to help the students to achieve goals of what their curriculum is all about. He has been honored with awards for coming up with ways of problem-solving as his contribution to pedagogy. His interpretation of the theory involves six stages of learning that an educator needs to address to a learner. The six steps include acquiring knowledge, understanding it, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation as represented diagrammatically below, Diagram 1 Steps of learning The six stages are categorized into two: lower-order and high-order targets. Recall of knowledge, comprehension of the material and its application are lower-order while analysis, synthesis and final evaluation are high-order. According to Benjamin, these objectives follow a specific structure and process skills. STAGE TARGET STRUCTURE PROCESS Knowledge Lower-order Factual data, Labels and Indicators Labeling and identifying Comprehension Lower-order Description and explanation of the data Defining and explaining Application Lower-order Aspiration and simulation Modeling and simulating STAGE TARGET STRUCTURE PROCESS USED Analysis High-order Inquiries and examination Comparing and contrasting Synthesis High-order Creation and composition Developing and creating Judgment High-order Evaluation and appraisal Judging and assessing Table 1 Structures and processes of the steps of learning Benjamin’s theory reflects on behaviorist styles of learners and their educators. Habitual methods are extensively employed in the class settings. He also asserts in his inscription that habits influence humanistic traits such as intelligence and willpower, hence, broadcasting experience from these traits. The theory also features environmental effects on the behavior of humans. It is necessary in scrutinizing taxonomic pedagogy on educationists. Benjamin concentrates on the ecological aspects of his theory. He strongly observes the relationship between man and his/her environment and how the relationship affects the education process. He places the achievement of the six steps of learning greatly depends on a successful ecological balance. Educators have seen the need to give learners scholastic models to enable them realize their full academic potential. Learners reach different levels of success depending on how much potential one places to education. There is always a number one and one who is the last. Energy input of the teachers in providing models determines the potential. Many learning institutions reach higher levels of success than others, as I have learnt in many schools all over Australia. The curriculums used in schools by teachers in teaching and assessment have made the learning process essential in enabling the learners to accomplish success. Effective use of curriculums in the course of study embeds studies as a culture. Teachers get a first insight of the curriculum and through the steps of learning a learner are then equipped with the content. Development of the curriculum is conceptualized as per protocol and preference influenced by scientific notions. The six stages of learning devised by Benjamin are relative and include merging learning symbols for evaluation and estimation of the symbols imagery. He also addresses the learning environment of a student, something that the other theorists have not fully addressed. He also foretells and shows continuity of the future of education. Through the interrelated nature of association and systematization, the theoretical position anticipates future educationists like Friederich Froebel in the nineteenth century and Benjamin Bloom in the twentieth century (Farenga & Ness, 2005, p 934). There are minor limitations with Benjamin’s theory only; it makes it one of the most effective theories of pedagogy to be ever formulated. This theory gives students a quick mode of research while assessing their respective curricula. A learner keen on learning will intensify understanding by referring to Benjamin’s theory. This work has been referenced in nearly every study having to do with student learning and assessment and is a staple in most curriculum, instruction, and assessment courses in schools of education for the past fifty years (Farenga & Ness, 2005, p 914). Conclusion The pedagogic theories explained in my pedagogic creed are for the basic essence of achieving sustainability of education. (Murray, 2011, p.240) From the information gathered above I believe that my pedagogic creed is uniquely designed to address the four theories in relation to education I believe that education through pedagogical theories discussed above all work at empowering the literacy level of a learner through assistance of the educators, formal and informal. To the best of my knowledge is that education is vital and be done anywhere, whether in a school or not. They have also presented dominant cultures of education and also encompass initiatives of promoting learning technologies in support of pedagogy. References Albright, J. & Luke, A. (2008). Pierre Bourdieu and Literacy Education. New York: Routledge. Alexander, R. & Alexander, R. J. (2008) Essays on Pedagogy. New York: Routledge. Farenga, S. J. & Ness. D. (2005). Encyclopedia of education and human development. New York: M.E. Sharpe. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. Giroux, H. A & McLaren, P. (2005). Critical Pedagogy: The state and cultural struggle. New York: SUNY Press. Giroux, H.A. (2000). Teachers as intellectuals: toward a critical pedagogy of learning. Critical studies in education series. Los Angeles: Greenwood Publishing Group. Hall, K., Murphy, P. F. & Soler, J. (2008). Pedagogy and practice: culture and identities. New York: SAGE Publication Ltd. Hewlett, N. (2010). Badiou, Balibar, Ranciere: Re-thinking Emancipation. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. Jones, P., Selby, D. & Sterling, S. (2010) Sustainability Education: Perspectives and practice across Higher Education. Washington: Earthscan. Kritzman, L. D. & Reilly, B. J. (2007). The Columbia History of Twentieth-Century French Thought. New York: Columbia University Press. Loughran, J. J. (2006). Developing Pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. New York: Taylor & Francis. McLaren, P. & Kincheloe, J. L. (2007). Critical Pedagogy: Where are we now? New York: Peter Lang. McLaren, P. (1995). Critical pedagogy and predatory culture: oppositional politics in a postmodern era. New York: Routledge. McLaren, P. (2000). Che Guevara, Paulo Freire, and the pedagogy of revolution: Culture and education series. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. Mulcahy, C. M, (2010). Marginalized Literacies: critical literacy in the language arts classroom Contemporary research in education. New Jersey: IAP. Murray, P. (2011). The Sustainable Self: A personal Approach to Sustainability Education. New York: Stylus Pub Llc. Ranciere, J. & Parker, A. (2004). The Philosopher and his poor. New York: Duke University Press. Simons, M. & Masschelein, J. (2011). Rancire, Public Education and the Taming of Democracy. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Smith, M. K. (1997, 2002). Paulo Freire and informal education. The encyclopedias of informal education. Retrieved November 4 2011 from http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-freir.htm. Last update: September 22, 2011. Spring, J. H (2006) Pedagogies of Globalization: The rise of the Educational Security State. Sociocultural, political and historical studies in education. New York: Routledge. Tanke, J. J. (2011). Jacques Ranciere: An Introduction. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. Read More