Talk:Critical pedagogy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pretty much all of this page is unencyclopedic, non-NPOV crap - I'd scrap everything except the first para.--XmarkX 18:23, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- And not well written, either. The bulleted lists fit within the NPOV guidelines, however, as they're clearly labeled as examples of possible discussions, not presented as flat editorial. If I were an educator interested in the approach I'd find the second one useful. --Clarknova 04:45, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Comments
Interesting article. It is informally written but I find less of it being POV except the references used. I say this because "Emperor's New Clothes" is a western idiom/allusion & would need further explanation. The instances at the end, although they are interesting, seem oddly placed without a defining header.
I don't mind the informality, unfortunately I think some of the more institutionally leaning folx here will be a bit distraught by it. I would make some adjustments to these items:
- make different sections (the changing from teaching examples, to ideological quotes, critiques, and pop-culture references. Without the different sections this appears more like a term paper & less like a Wiki article
- replace western idioms/euphamisms or link them to allow a better explanation
- Emperor's new cloths
- Western culture is doing the sleepwalking
- Separate the reality-changing questions from being intertwined in the body.
I'm asking the article's author to parse the article. I'm not very well versed in the subject but I'll consider reformatting it (that's really what it needs, not really a substance-rewrite). --Duemellon 14:38, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I'll try and make the changes you suggest when I get a moment. Please feel free to go ahead and reformat it yourself if you'd like. It sounds like you will do it without butchering the tone or content, which I really appreciate. Peace. --User:Juggleandhope 26 Aug 2004
[edit] Total Revamp
Bam!!
there u go. Whaddya think? Personally I tried to make the effort to de-Westernize it. I dropped a few examples that seemed tenuously linked. Some of those things that I'm not fully comfortable with are:
- the Bible quote seems to address materialism, not skeptism or counter-domination thought
- Paul Simon's song wasn't about counter-domination. So, out-of-context, the quote fits, but in context it's just a sidenote. Pink Floyd's song, however, is very much relevent to that
- The authors listed were from another site where the original article (before I updated) seems to have been taken (almost word-for-word). I have not really investigated them & am unsure of their relevance.
- the statement that Crit Pedagogy includes elements from fem/marx & such seems a bit more like an unwarranted stretch of the concept. Especially Marxism.
What do you think? What should be added? Help? (I'm lookin right at you Juggleandhope) --Duemellon 19:51, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Critical pedagogy
I attended a symposium this past weekend that had Peter Mclaren as the keynote speaker. His address was about critical pedagogy. Try telling him the marxism/critical pedagogy connection is a stretch- all he talked about was marxism (he ended his speech with "Viva La Revolution!") I can't tell you if I think it's a stretch since I really don't know enough about critical pedagogy to offer an informed opinion, but I can tell you Mclaren seems to observe strong connections between the two.
- Critical pedagogy is like any other approach used to divine knowledge. It can be used for anything. I could use it to suggest that the Branch Dividians or the Halle-Bopp cult were right. It's more about constantly questioning reality as it is presented to you which leaves a big hole in your knowledge. There are those who seek to fill that void in the same breath with what they have come to conclude.
- Which is ironic indeed. They ask you to question your current authority but try to immediately replace it with their's. --Duemellon 20:55, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Pedagogy, at all?
The referred article of The Times, in the note after Pink Floyd, is a little naive. Pink Floyd, really inferrably, meant the establishment-education. For example, the ex-pupil who wants to go to university, presumably (as that is so usual), wants the privileges attached to a university degree. That is functional (money, prestige, etc). Once the education-system is the establishment, that is, as they could not dismantle that, they are judged by that standard -- even only the paper with your name on that, as a graduate, is functional. Please read the page, on education-ex. ( http://www.geocities.com/ferzenr/education.ex.htm )
For another example, the ex-pupil who is helping those with learning disabilities, and shivers when listening that song, is kind of a guide/pychologist. Function, again.
For a motto, "To develop (ourselves) is not evil. To get crushed and wasted is."
That is, we may take the Pink Floyd case, within the given context. That is the urge for their/our revolt.
Personally, I'm not a critical type, if there is nothing wrong around :-) I have faith that Allah created people, with our different personalities and abilities each. Formaze ( http://www.geocities.com/ferzenr/formaze.htm ) is for each. By contrast, the school system is gross -- coarse curricula.
FerzenR 09:11, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
When I posted this note, the time @ home was 11:11 Next, I noticed that 9:11 thing -- when listed as UTC time. I hope this instance of "9:11" is helping the human race in a positive way, though. :-)) FerzenR 05:55, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Critics of CritPedag
The statement:
- Many people involved in critical pedagogy have never been involved in serious struggles themselves and have used the field to build themselves rather than a social movement.
Seems a bit forced. Is the intent to label the critpedag as a moaner or just a fame-seeking complainer? I'm not too sure what the value is off having this statement included in the way it is. Please rephrase. --Duemellon 02:54, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Brazil commies?
There was a entry into the article suggesting CritPedag came about from an effort to disrupt communism in Brazil seemd biased & also inaccurate. The origins of CritPedag isn't modern, but if you feel this is a relevent item to include, please do so with proper citation. --Duemellon 12:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of the Duke Link
Why? --Duemellon 12:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
