Griff Foley. (2001). International Journal of Lifelong Education, 20 (1/2), 71-88.
"Radical adult educators are those who work for emancipatory social change and whose work engages with the learning dimension of social life." (p. 72)
Foley acknowledged the democratic imperatives of Carl Rogers's approach to humanistic education, in which meaningful experiential learning was emphasized; yet, Rogers, unlike critical and radical educators, ignored social analysis and political commitment. More, Foley finds the root of the confusion in defining power in Rogers's approach to non-directive teaching. In Foley's definition, empowerment in education takes place when educators use their power to create educational situation in which learners can exercise power. For him, it is neither something that educators can do for the learners nor something that can be obtained by abandoning the educator's power. Foley suggests the educator's active role in empowering the learners. In this regard, he put it:
This will involve educators in recognizing the invasiveness of their work and struggling with learners to build a different sort of relationship, one that is based on a notion of solidarity rather than on a patronizing notion of service. (p. 75)
In an triumphal capitalism, Foley argued, radical adult education needs to be more strategic. One of the strategies is the action research method. He said that it is "ordinary yet radical... because it uncovers, and acts on, what is generally hidden and untouched. (pp. 82-83)
"We learn as we act, and our learning is both tacit and explicit" (p. 86). Foley emphasizes the understanding of the complex learning process that takes place in places where we work and live. [How is this statement related to the participatory research?]
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Power in practice
: adult education and the struggle for knowledge and power in society. Ronald Cervero & Arther Wilson (Eds.). (2001). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Preface (xv-xxi)
The authors pointed out that the literature of adult education lacked an examination of power relations manifested in adult education, although adults became more engaged in learning activity and the issues of knowledge and power are pervasive. Within this context, they ask, "who benefits from and who should benefit from the programs, practices, and policies of adult education?" (p. xv)
The authors empathized that adult education is concerned not only about knowledge distribution but also social, cultural, and economic power, which they called 'material effects' (p. 2). Holding this position, they reviewed three different conceptions of the political in adult education practice:
1) "The political is personal" (articulated by Freire's partner, Knowles's andragogue, Mezirow's emancipatory educator, Daloz's mentor, Belenky's mid-wife, and Brookfield's skillful teacher): the authors critiqued this learner-centered view romanticizes learners. In this view, they argued, "the highest professional and moral principle for adult educators, then, to involve learners in identifying their needs" (p. 5). They further described:
"Key metaphors are those of building on the experience of these potential adult learners; hearing their "voice", which has often been silenced; or giving them access to learning opportunities that historically have been denied" (p. 5)
The authors argued that lack of social structural reference in this view only addressed universal purposes and failed to approach the political in the context of adult education.
2) "The political is practical": This view is concerned primarily about getting things done from the perspective of educators. Thu, the authors argued, this perspective "lacks an analysis of adult education's relationship to the wider systems of power in society, this view of politics does not usually have an explicit social vision of whose interests should be served by adult education" (pp. 7-8).
3) "The political is structural": This view is not concerned about generic adult learners but learners who are oppressed by socially structured power. As a pitfall of this approach, the authors pointed out that it failed to provide concrete direction for micro practice. There exists a structural framework, but it lacks "applied, middle-range work" (Apple, 1988, p, 200, "Teachers and text", as cited p. 10). [My research, by probing this approach at work through participatory research practice, will contribute to suggesting such applied knowledge to address power relations in the context of adult education.]
Within these strands of the political, the authors finally proposed three propositions:
1) There is a reciprocal relationship between power and adult education: They argued, "power relationships both provide the grounds for action in adult education and are also always acted on by adult education" (p. 11). In other words, the power relations structuring our lives are played out in adult education; at the same time, adult education contributes to redistributing the power.
2) Adult education is a site of struggle for knowledge and power:
[Foley (1993, The neighborhood house: site of struggle, site of learning, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 14(1), 21-37, p. 20) wrote, "A major problem, though, with much supposedly critical adult education theory is that it is often very abstract; it has generally failed to develop analyses of adult learning in particular social contexts" (p. 20).]
[A thought: my research allows looking at adult learning at a micro level.]
The authors empathized that the struggle for knowledge and power define the politics of adult education and stated that this standpoint recognizes multiple interests at stake in adult education activity and requires negotiations of these conflicts, which leads to the question,"who benefit?"
3) All adult educators are social activists in practice (regardless of his or her particular perspective on society). In this light, the authors refuted adult educators as neutral knowledge facilitator, but knowledge-power brokers, who constantly question who (should) benefit from this education.
/// epilogue
The authors took the stance that adult education is a critical site for the struggle of knowledge and power, yet noted the limit of the current research after compiling the empirical studies:
"We share, however, a continuing concern that our actual practices in distributing knowledge, reshaping structures, and changing who benefits remain idiosyncratic and undeveloped" (pp. 268-69)
[Can this limitation overcome through participatory research as a form of adult education?]
Preface (xv-xxi)
The authors pointed out that the literature of adult education lacked an examination of power relations manifested in adult education, although adults became more engaged in learning activity and the issues of knowledge and power are pervasive. Within this context, they ask, "who benefits from and who should benefit from the programs, practices, and policies of adult education?" (p. xv)
The authors empathized that adult education is concerned not only about knowledge distribution but also social, cultural, and economic power, which they called 'material effects' (p. 2). Holding this position, they reviewed three different conceptions of the political in adult education practice:
1) "The political is personal" (articulated by Freire's partner, Knowles's andragogue, Mezirow's emancipatory educator, Daloz's mentor, Belenky's mid-wife, and Brookfield's skillful teacher): the authors critiqued this learner-centered view romanticizes learners. In this view, they argued, "the highest professional and moral principle for adult educators, then, to involve learners in identifying their needs" (p. 5). They further described:
"Key metaphors are those of building on the experience of these potential adult learners; hearing their "voice", which has often been silenced; or giving them access to learning opportunities that historically have been denied" (p. 5)
The authors argued that lack of social structural reference in this view only addressed universal purposes and failed to approach the political in the context of adult education.
2) "The political is practical": This view is concerned primarily about getting things done from the perspective of educators. Thu, the authors argued, this perspective "lacks an analysis of adult education's relationship to the wider systems of power in society, this view of politics does not usually have an explicit social vision of whose interests should be served by adult education" (pp. 7-8).
3) "The political is structural": This view is not concerned about generic adult learners but learners who are oppressed by socially structured power. As a pitfall of this approach, the authors pointed out that it failed to provide concrete direction for micro practice. There exists a structural framework, but it lacks "applied, middle-range work" (Apple, 1988, p, 200, "Teachers and text", as cited p. 10). [My research, by probing this approach at work through participatory research practice, will contribute to suggesting such applied knowledge to address power relations in the context of adult education.]
Within these strands of the political, the authors finally proposed three propositions:
1) There is a reciprocal relationship between power and adult education: They argued, "power relationships both provide the grounds for action in adult education and are also always acted on by adult education" (p. 11). In other words, the power relations structuring our lives are played out in adult education; at the same time, adult education contributes to redistributing the power.
2) Adult education is a site of struggle for knowledge and power:
[Foley (1993, The neighborhood house: site of struggle, site of learning, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 14(1), 21-37, p. 20) wrote, "A major problem, though, with much supposedly critical adult education theory is that it is often very abstract; it has generally failed to develop analyses of adult learning in particular social contexts" (p. 20).]
[A thought: my research allows looking at adult learning at a micro level.]
The authors empathized that the struggle for knowledge and power define the politics of adult education and stated that this standpoint recognizes multiple interests at stake in adult education activity and requires negotiations of these conflicts, which leads to the question,"who benefit?"
3) All adult educators are social activists in practice (regardless of his or her particular perspective on society). In this light, the authors refuted adult educators as neutral knowledge facilitator, but knowledge-power brokers, who constantly question who (should) benefit from this education.
/// epilogue
The authors took the stance that adult education is a critical site for the struggle of knowledge and power, yet noted the limit of the current research after compiling the empirical studies:
"We share, however, a continuing concern that our actual practices in distributing knowledge, reshaping structures, and changing who benefits remain idiosyncratic and undeveloped" (pp. 268-69)
[Can this limitation overcome through participatory research as a form of adult education?]
Sunday, September 26, 2010
The art of case study research
Robert E. Stake. (1995). Thousand Oaks, London and Delhi: Sage.
Stake divided case study into intrinsic and instrumental: intrinsic case study is carried out when the case holds unique intrinsic interest and researchers often do not have a choice for the case. Instrumental case study, on the other hand, is often performed to obtain a general understanding of a phenomenon or relationships within it beyond the particular case. Stake, however, acknowledge that case study is not opt for generalization, yet empathized that it allows refinement of understanding, labeling this "petite generalization" as opposed to "grand generalization" (p. 7). Thus, he argued, "The real business of case study is particularization, not generalization. . . . There is emphasis on uniqueness, . . . understanding the case itself" (p. 8).
Stake stated that the case itself matters to intrinsic case study whereas an issue matters more to instrumental case study. Stating issues appears to me stating a central research question by Creswell. Stake wrote that the issue can be stated as simple as "instructional role of the principal", but urged it to be more descriptive, perhaps in a causal way, such as "Is the accountability of the central office diminish the primary role of a principal in a local school?"
This issue statement leads to research design and conceptualization. He, then, suggested to come up with information and evaluative questions.
As id Clifford Geertz (1973) emphasized "thick description" in his ethnographic research, Stake stressed the importance of a researcher's interpretation as an integral part of qualitative research. Similar to thick description or multiple realities, he called experiential learning "natualistic generalization" (Sake & Trumbull, 1982). In the context of research, it implies a researcher's role, which is "not veridical representation so much as stimulation of further reflection, optimizing readers' opportunity to learn" (p. 42). As opposed to explicated generalizations, Stake's definition of naturalistic generalization stems from information recipients' perspective:
Naturalistic generalizations are conclusions arrived at through personal engagement in life's affairs or by vicarious experience so well constructed that the person feels as if it happened to themselves. (p. 85)
The importance of naturalistic generalization, Stake stated, is that it is embedded in the experience of the reader. [this process of generalization is empathetic such that readers come to understand the described issue by empathetical feeling. Then, does this mean that naturalistic generalization may exclude some readers who cannot have a similar background or experience?]
In order to help readers make naturalistic generalization, Stake argued, researchers need to provide them with "vicarious experience, " empathizing time, space, and person in the researchers' account. Specifically,
Our accounts need to be personal, describing the things of our sensory experiences, not failing to attend to the matters that personal curiosity dictates. A narrative account, a story, a chronological presentation, personalistic description, emphasis on time and place provide rich ingredients for vicatious experience. (pp. 86-87)
Subjectivity is not seen as a pitfall of qualitative research by Stake. Although qualitative researchers have routines for triangulation to validate their observations, Stake noted, such routines are used often to approximate those in quantitative research, yet there are no definite protocols to set subjective misunderstanding for a test.
Stake defined the roles of case researchers--as teacher, advocate, evaluator, biographer, interpreter, and theorist who uses "the uniqueness of the case to illustrate ways in which each case is likely to be complex, not what cases have in common" (p. 105).
Triangulation (107-120)
The protocols identified by Denzin in his book, The Research Act, Stake summarized data source triangulation, investigator triangulation, theory triangulation, and methodological triangulation. In addition to the triangulation, Stake empathized member checking, research subjects' feedback on research report drafts. With this respect, Stake (p. 116) wrote:
In long use of member checking, I typically get little back from the actor--not very satisfying byt entirely necessary. I often do not have all my facts straight and I need help. I impose upon the actors' time to do some of my work. The most frequent response of the actors to whom I have sent drafts is not to acknowledge that I have sent anything. Often, the account is routine, apparently not deserving a response. But sometimes I get a thorough reading, a mutually respectful argument, and suggestions for improvement. I think I can say that all my reports have been improved by member checking.
Writing the report (121-131)
Stake refuted story-telling as a form of a case study report. He also argued that traditional research report--statement of the problem, literature review, design, data gathering, analysis and conclusion is ill-fitting for a case study report, either. One thing he suggested here is using a vignette to serve the issue (problem) and assertion. (Read Harry Wolcott's (1990) Writing up qualitative research)
Stake divided case study into intrinsic and instrumental: intrinsic case study is carried out when the case holds unique intrinsic interest and researchers often do not have a choice for the case. Instrumental case study, on the other hand, is often performed to obtain a general understanding of a phenomenon or relationships within it beyond the particular case. Stake, however, acknowledge that case study is not opt for generalization, yet empathized that it allows refinement of understanding, labeling this "petite generalization" as opposed to "grand generalization" (p. 7). Thus, he argued, "The real business of case study is particularization, not generalization. . . . There is emphasis on uniqueness, . . . understanding the case itself" (p. 8).
Stake stated that the case itself matters to intrinsic case study whereas an issue matters more to instrumental case study. Stating issues appears to me stating a central research question by Creswell. Stake wrote that the issue can be stated as simple as "instructional role of the principal", but urged it to be more descriptive, perhaps in a causal way, such as "Is the accountability of the central office diminish the primary role of a principal in a local school?"
This issue statement leads to research design and conceptualization. He, then, suggested to come up with information and evaluative questions.
As id Clifford Geertz (1973) emphasized "thick description" in his ethnographic research, Stake stressed the importance of a researcher's interpretation as an integral part of qualitative research. Similar to thick description or multiple realities, he called experiential learning "natualistic generalization" (Sake & Trumbull, 1982). In the context of research, it implies a researcher's role, which is "not veridical representation so much as stimulation of further reflection, optimizing readers' opportunity to learn" (p. 42). As opposed to explicated generalizations, Stake's definition of naturalistic generalization stems from information recipients' perspective:
Naturalistic generalizations are conclusions arrived at through personal engagement in life's affairs or by vicarious experience so well constructed that the person feels as if it happened to themselves. (p. 85)
The importance of naturalistic generalization, Stake stated, is that it is embedded in the experience of the reader. [this process of generalization is empathetic such that readers come to understand the described issue by empathetical feeling. Then, does this mean that naturalistic generalization may exclude some readers who cannot have a similar background or experience?]
In order to help readers make naturalistic generalization, Stake argued, researchers need to provide them with "vicarious experience, " empathizing time, space, and person in the researchers' account. Specifically,
Our accounts need to be personal, describing the things of our sensory experiences, not failing to attend to the matters that personal curiosity dictates. A narrative account, a story, a chronological presentation, personalistic description, emphasis on time and place provide rich ingredients for vicatious experience. (pp. 86-87)
Subjectivity is not seen as a pitfall of qualitative research by Stake. Although qualitative researchers have routines for triangulation to validate their observations, Stake noted, such routines are used often to approximate those in quantitative research, yet there are no definite protocols to set subjective misunderstanding for a test.
Stake defined the roles of case researchers--as teacher, advocate, evaluator, biographer, interpreter, and theorist who uses "the uniqueness of the case to illustrate ways in which each case is likely to be complex, not what cases have in common" (p. 105).
Triangulation (107-120)
The protocols identified by Denzin in his book, The Research Act, Stake summarized data source triangulation, investigator triangulation, theory triangulation, and methodological triangulation. In addition to the triangulation, Stake empathized member checking, research subjects' feedback on research report drafts. With this respect, Stake (p. 116) wrote:
In long use of member checking, I typically get little back from the actor--not very satisfying byt entirely necessary. I often do not have all my facts straight and I need help. I impose upon the actors' time to do some of my work. The most frequent response of the actors to whom I have sent drafts is not to acknowledge that I have sent anything. Often, the account is routine, apparently not deserving a response. But sometimes I get a thorough reading, a mutually respectful argument, and suggestions for improvement. I think I can say that all my reports have been improved by member checking.
Writing the report (121-131)
Stake refuted story-telling as a form of a case study report. He also argued that traditional research report--statement of the problem, literature review, design, data gathering, analysis and conclusion is ill-fitting for a case study report, either. One thing he suggested here is using a vignette to serve the issue (problem) and assertion. (Read Harry Wolcott's (1990) Writing up qualitative research)
Synthesizing Gramsci and Freire: possibilities for a theory of radical adult education
Peter Mayo. (1994). Int'l journal of lifelong education, 13(2), 125-48.
Mayo proposed a foundation of a radical theory of adult education grounded in the concepts and practices of Gramsci and Freire. Here he suggested:
1) "[R]adical adult education initiatives should be rooted in a commitment to confronting oppression" (p. 140) and it should aim at emancipation from oppression.
2) Radical adult education should recognize the importance of cultural activity as a site of struggle by problematizing the taken-for-granted reality and exposing the underlying ideologies.
3) Radical adult education should be seen in the context of social movement against different forms of oppression across gender, class, race, and ethnicity.
4) The aspect of culture is important to radical adult education. Mayo argued that for Freire, "the dominant language be taught by radical adult educators in a problematizing manner, whereas Gramsci thought "subordinated people should learn the dominant language in order to survive in the power struggle" (p. 143) [This interpretation is not so convincing.] Anyhow, Mayo argued that radical adult educators should critically incorporate the dominant culture in order to empower the learners.
As a limitation of their perspectives, Mayo pointed out (1) the failure to take account of the complexity of the nature of oppression. In particular, Freire has been criticized by feminist scholars for his lack of sustained analysis of race, gender and sexuality. In particular, Weiler (1991, Freire and a feminist pedagogy of difference. Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 61, No. 4,
pp. 449-474.) criticized the simplicity of the dichotomy between oppressor and oppressed overlooked the multiplicity of subjectivities involved in learning. Thus, Mayo suggested, radical adult education should include feminist and anti-racist education.
Lastly Mayo pointed out global capitalism, in which business climate takes over democracy (Ross and Trachte's (1990), cited 144). According to him, it can devastate adult education by limiting public funds to social programs. Given that situation, he argued that the locus of power should be given to international forces beyond the dynamic of national-popular and called for international alliance.
As Coben rightly pointed out, Mayo does not clearly state the purpose of the education in this essay. He talked about emancipation from oppression, but doesn't talk about whether the oppression originate and which end we go at the end... Here, emancipation is no more than a romanticized idealistic myth.
Mayo proposed a foundation of a radical theory of adult education grounded in the concepts and practices of Gramsci and Freire. Here he suggested:
1) "[R]adical adult education initiatives should be rooted in a commitment to confronting oppression" (p. 140) and it should aim at emancipation from oppression.
2) Radical adult education should recognize the importance of cultural activity as a site of struggle by problematizing the taken-for-granted reality and exposing the underlying ideologies.
3) Radical adult education should be seen in the context of social movement against different forms of oppression across gender, class, race, and ethnicity.
4) The aspect of culture is important to radical adult education. Mayo argued that for Freire, "the dominant language be taught by radical adult educators in a problematizing manner, whereas Gramsci thought "subordinated people should learn the dominant language in order to survive in the power struggle" (p. 143) [This interpretation is not so convincing.] Anyhow, Mayo argued that radical adult educators should critically incorporate the dominant culture in order to empower the learners.
As a limitation of their perspectives, Mayo pointed out (1) the failure to take account of the complexity of the nature of oppression. In particular, Freire has been criticized by feminist scholars for his lack of sustained analysis of race, gender and sexuality. In particular, Weiler (1991, Freire and a feminist pedagogy of difference. Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 61, No. 4,
pp. 449-474.) criticized the simplicity of the dichotomy between oppressor and oppressed overlooked the multiplicity of subjectivities involved in learning. Thus, Mayo suggested, radical adult education should include feminist and anti-racist education.
Lastly Mayo pointed out global capitalism, in which business climate takes over democracy (Ross and Trachte's (1990), cited 144). According to him, it can devastate adult education by limiting public funds to social programs. Given that situation, he argued that the locus of power should be given to international forces beyond the dynamic of national-popular and called for international alliance.
As Coben rightly pointed out, Mayo does not clearly state the purpose of the education in this essay. He talked about emancipation from oppression, but doesn't talk about whether the oppression originate and which end we go at the end... Here, emancipation is no more than a romanticized idealistic myth.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Demystifying literacy: reading, writing and the struggle for liberation
By: James, Michael D., Convergence, Vol. 23, Issue 1, 14-25.
James argued that the prevailing tendency in literacy programs was remedial and they aimed at adaptation in spite of the illusory notion of empowering people. Unlike the prevailing assumption, he stressed that "knowledge itself is not power. Power occurs only in material relationships" (p. 18) and "Literacy by itself does not and cannot change oppressive conditions". He argued "Literacy is a part of liberation only when it is consciously linked with the process of "rupturing colonial domination, recovering democratic life, or revolutionary triumph."(p. 24)
This article makes me think of the OP. It does not declare "adaptation" as its goal, but "liberation". Yet, does it envision material relationship or "an instrument of struggle" (p. 24)?Doesn't it enlarge the mystification that freeing mind would free one from material constraints?
Then, how this educational approach would be contrasted with my approach to education through participatory research?
James argued that the prevailing tendency in literacy programs was remedial and they aimed at adaptation in spite of the illusory notion of empowering people. Unlike the prevailing assumption, he stressed that "knowledge itself is not power. Power occurs only in material relationships" (p. 18) and "Literacy by itself does not and cannot change oppressive conditions". He argued "Literacy is a part of liberation only when it is consciously linked with the process of "rupturing colonial domination, recovering democratic life, or revolutionary triumph."(p. 24)
This article makes me think of the OP. It does not declare "adaptation" as its goal, but "liberation". Yet, does it envision material relationship or "an instrument of struggle" (p. 24)?Doesn't it enlarge the mystification that freeing mind would free one from material constraints?
Then, how this educational approach would be contrasted with my approach to education through participatory research?
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Radical heroes
: Gramsci, Freire and the politics of adult education. Coben, Diana. (1998). New York and London: Garland publishing.
Forward (pp. vii-x, Joe Kincheloe)
Kincheloe stated that radical adult education focus on pedagogical intervention to develop practical forms of resistance to escape constraints of hegemonic power placed in people's lives. From his stance, therefore, adult educators are "facilitators of empowerment" (p. x).
Radical heroes in an age of uncertainty (pp. 3-8)
Criticizing the theoretical weakness of adult education, Coben pointed out as its reasons that the widespread assumption that education has to do with children and young people resulted in a low research profile and even in that research, most focused on political theory; in addition, the education of adults has dealt with practice in a field and thus theory has been placed in a back seat.
Against this background, Coben read Antonio Gramsci and Paulo Freire to theorize adult education in the political context. Specifically, she examines Gramsci's educative concept of politics and Freire's political concept of education liberating the oppressed.
Antonio Gramsci: politics as educative (pp. 9-52)
Coben explored Gramci's educative concept of politics focusing on "hegemony" and "intellectuals". (Then, education)
Although Gramsci was not the first Marxist to use the term hegemony and the precise meaning is contested, Coben agreed that "Gramsci's concept of hegemony is a major contribution to Marxist theory and key to an understanding of his educative conception of politics" (13-14). His concept of hegemony is a way of a state's ruling and comprises the "'spontaneous' consent given by the great masses of the population to the general direction imposed on social life by the dominant fundamental group" (SPN:12, as cited on the page 15). Important to this concept, Coben noted, is that the state maintains its hegemony by presenting dominant class interests as universal:
It is true that the state is seen as the organ of one particular class, . . . But the development and expansion of the particular group are conceived of, and presented, as being the motor force of a universal expansion, of a development of all the 'national' energies. In other words, the dominant group is coordinated concretely with the general interests of the subordinate groups, . . . (SPN:183)
Coben stressed Gramsci's attention to the state's ethical role in education as a means of maintaining hegemony. Gramsci put it, "Every state is ethical in as much as one of its most important functions is to raise the great mass of the population to a particular cultural and moral level . . ." (SPN: 258).
This particular level of achievement corresponds to the productive force and thus to the interests of the ruling classes, emphasized Coben.[Think about NCLB, the achivement is for what?] For Gramsci, therefore, education interweaves with the maintenance of hegemony. He put:
Every relationship of 'hegemony' is necessarily an educational relationship and occurs not only within a nation, between the various forces that comprise it, but in the entire international and world filed, between complexes of national and continental civilizations (FSPN:157, cited on the page 17)
Putting forward the notion that "all men are intellectuals" (SPN:9) as his theory of the intellectuals, Gramsci pointed out that their intellectual function should be developed through experience and education, noted Coben. Here rejected is the idea that intellectuals are independent of class and social context. Instead, Gramsci conceptualized organic intellectuals as opposed to traditional. Organic intellectuals are rooted in their class and perform an educational role to organize the class hegemony over society, whereas traditional intellectuals are intellectuals of the ruling class. Gramsci stressed that despite the difficulty of producing working-class organic intellectuals, the creation of such intellectuals was key to social revolution.
[Reading this passage, I think of the notion of elite professors OP students mentioned. Here the elites are far from the students' class, yet the instructors are seen as elite intellectuals, which can be categorized as traditional intellectuals according to Gramsci, although the two concepts, traditional and organic, are not mutually exclusive in Gramsci (Quintin, 1980; Coben, as cited on 19.)]
p. 22
Coben sharply pointed out that for Gramsci, the organization of hegemony of a subjugated class was key to opposing the ideological structure of a dominant class. The process of organizing the hegemony suggests Gramsci's idea of adult education. One of the activities that Gramsci empathized for the organization was a forming cultural group through journalism. This cultural group "aims to spread an integral conception of the world through various journalistic activities" (SCW: 430, as cited 23-24). Defining this type of journalism as "integral" one, Gramsci elaborated:
[Integral journalism is] one that seeks not only to satisfy all the needs (of a given category) of its public, but also to create and develop these needs, to arouse its public and progressively enlarge it. (SCW: 408, as cited on 23)
In his term, culture means "thinking well, whatever one thinks, and therefore acting well, whatever one does" (SCW:25). Here, culture means praxis, informed action (Freire, Pedagogy of the oppressed). More clearly, he wrote, "Study and culture for us are none other than the theoretical consciousness of our immediate and supreme goals, and the way in which we will succeed in translating them into action" (FSPN: xxxiii, cited 33).
For Gramsci, education is organizing culture and this organized culture becomes hegemonic. He summarized the tasks of cultural organizations:
"Its task is to offer a forum for a through and popular discussion of the economic and moral problems which life brings or will bring to the attention of the proletariat" (SCW: 23, cited 32)
His criticism on philanthropic institutions for adult education further illuminates his perspective on adult education:
[We need] the detailed work of discussing and investigating problems, work in which everybody participates, to which everybody contributes, in which everybody is both master and disciple" (SCW: 25, cited 34)
This perspective also suggests that the process of education is similar to journalism.
Coben concludes Gramsci's perspective on education:
"The education of adults, broadly conceived in Gramscian terms, is a means through which revolutionary organic intellectuals may be developed and equipped to undertake the crucial, painstaking work of organizing revolutionary hegemony" (p. 50).
//////
FSPN: Further selections from the Prison Notebooks/Antonio Gramsci, edited and translated by D. Boothman. Mineapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press (1995)
SPN: Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci, edited and translated by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith. London: Lawrence and Wishart (1971)
SCW: Selections from cultural writings. edited by D. Forgas and G. Nowell Smith, translated by W. Boelhouwer. London: Lawrence and Wishart. 1985
///
Paulo Friere: Education as Political (53-114)
His ideas of adult education are well explored in two articles, "The adult literacy process as cultural action for freedom" and "Cultural action and consicentization" published by Harvard Educational Review (1970) and later as a book titled Cultural Action for Freedom (Harvard University Press, 1970).
Coben noted that for Freire, conscientization is the aim of education and the concepts of praxis and dialogue are its two principles. Freire wrote, "Consicentization represents the development of the awakening of critical awareness" (EPF: 19). He wrote that typically poor people are concerned only with survival and fall prey to magical explanations because they do not understand true causality (EPT). He argued that this tendency is characteristic of people trapped in the "culture of silence", which Coben explains, "unable to discover and articulate their view of the world and therefore unable to act to change it" (p. 73). For Freire, the goal of conscientization is characterized by "the depth in the interpretation of problems; by the substitution of causal principles for magical explanations; by the testing of one's "findings" and by openness to revision..."(EPF:18) In fact, this is what researchers try to do. Thereby, Freire suggested that concientization, the aim of education, should enable individuals to undertake these perspectives of doing research in their everyday life. For Freire, in other words, the conscientization is the process of interrogation and dialogical forms of life (EPF:18, as cited 75).
Limitations of Freire's concept of oppression, in particular, from the feminist perspective, Coben argued:
"Lacking an understanding of power, his model of oppression is just too simple and indiscriminate to accommodate the multifaceted and contradictory nature of differential power relationships in terms of gender, class or any other social category" (p. 97)
Coben takes a critical stance on Frerie's pedagogical process, criticizing the divisional pedagogical relationship: "the learner is constructed at the outset as passive, silent, ignorant, unaware, inexperienced, possibly fearful but acquiescent. By contrast, from the outset the educator is active, in control, free, aware, experienced, wise, fearless and self-sacrificing" (112-113). Further, Coben described this relationship as a sexualized one, the educator cast as the male lover and the learner as the female virginal beloved. This interpretation led her to the following conclusion of the concept of conscientization:
"This feminization and, to an extent, also, infantilization of the learner is the nub of the inequality at the heart of the Freirian pedagogical relationship. Conscientization, which Freire conceives as an act of love, is revealed as at best a consensual but unequal coupling, at worst an invasion, a rape" (p. 113). [ I would argue that participatory research should overcome this dichotomy by achieving mutual goals through research. Researchers/Facilitators are not an educator. This situation can lead to another form, more liberating, less assumptive, of adult education.]
Criticizing his universalist concept of oppression devoid of consistent class analysis as well as patriarchal leardership for revolution, Coben raised an essential question: "It is not enough to say that political leaders, or educators, must commit class suicide and devote their lives to the people. Without a clear political framework such action is a sacrifice, but to what end?" (p. 113)
///
EPF: Education: the practice of freedom, Writers and Readers, 1976.
CAF: Cultural action for freedom, Penguin, 1972.
///
Gramsci and Freire: apologias, critiques and interpretations (pp. 148-202)
I also would argue whether the literacy program that Freire advocated systematically leads to conscientization, self-reflection and criticality. Brian Street (CHECK OUT Literacy Theory and Practices (1984) Cambridge University Press.) Criticizing the "great divide" between literacy and illiteracy, he argued that self-reflection and critical thought were seen in nonliterate societies, undermining Freire's assmuption of literacy as a ground base for critical enlightenment (cited p 154).
Quoting Kidd and Kumar (1981) and Kidd and Byram (1982), Coben cautioned pseudo-Freirian adult education, which substitutes a concern with poverty with a liberatory concern with oppression, which corresponds to the argument that M.D. James (1990, Demystifying literacy: reading, writing, and the struggle for liberation, Convergence, 23(1), 14-26) made.
Coben noted the link between participatory research and adult education, quoting Ted Jackson (1981, Convergence, The influence of Gramsci on Adult Eduction, Convergence, 14(3), 81-6). Here, tracing participatory research around the world, he interpreted participatory research as an attempt to apply Gramsci's work to the field of adult education.
Coben read Peter Mayo's (1994, Synthesizing Gramsci and Freire: possibilities for a theory of radical adult education, Int'l journal of lifelong education, 13(2), 125-48) analysis of Gramsci and Freire as a foundation for a radical theory of adult education.
Again, Coben took on critical stance on Freire, arguing:
Freire's vision of the oppressed as humanized (civilized? redeemed?) through a process of conscinetization initiated and controlled by a born again leader/educator, motivated by love, may be inspirational for those who identify with the educator/leader/lover, but what of the other, the oppressed, who has not sought--any may not want--the educator's love or leadership?
Gramsci and Freire: Radical Heroes? (203-223)
Finally, Coben asked whether we need heros for adult education for social change and urged us to go beyond "hero worship" (p. 222) toward a politics of adult education engaging with purpose, process and content within the context of social change. In this light, she suggests that raising intellectuals "to practice their capacity for self-reflection" (p. 222) is a more sound purpose of educational activity in contrast with revolutionary commitment.
Forward (pp. vii-x, Joe Kincheloe)
Kincheloe stated that radical adult education focus on pedagogical intervention to develop practical forms of resistance to escape constraints of hegemonic power placed in people's lives. From his stance, therefore, adult educators are "facilitators of empowerment" (p. x).
Radical heroes in an age of uncertainty (pp. 3-8)
Criticizing the theoretical weakness of adult education, Coben pointed out as its reasons that the widespread assumption that education has to do with children and young people resulted in a low research profile and even in that research, most focused on political theory; in addition, the education of adults has dealt with practice in a field and thus theory has been placed in a back seat.
Against this background, Coben read Antonio Gramsci and Paulo Freire to theorize adult education in the political context. Specifically, she examines Gramsci's educative concept of politics and Freire's political concept of education liberating the oppressed.
Antonio Gramsci: politics as educative (pp. 9-52)
Coben explored Gramci's educative concept of politics focusing on "hegemony" and "intellectuals". (Then, education)
Although Gramsci was not the first Marxist to use the term hegemony and the precise meaning is contested, Coben agreed that "Gramsci's concept of hegemony is a major contribution to Marxist theory and key to an understanding of his educative conception of politics" (13-14). His concept of hegemony is a way of a state's ruling and comprises the "'spontaneous' consent given by the great masses of the population to the general direction imposed on social life by the dominant fundamental group" (SPN:12, as cited on the page 15). Important to this concept, Coben noted, is that the state maintains its hegemony by presenting dominant class interests as universal:
It is true that the state is seen as the organ of one particular class, . . . But the development and expansion of the particular group are conceived of, and presented, as being the motor force of a universal expansion, of a development of all the 'national' energies. In other words, the dominant group is coordinated concretely with the general interests of the subordinate groups, . . . (SPN:183)
Coben stressed Gramsci's attention to the state's ethical role in education as a means of maintaining hegemony. Gramsci put it, "Every state is ethical in as much as one of its most important functions is to raise the great mass of the population to a particular cultural and moral level . . ." (SPN: 258).
This particular level of achievement corresponds to the productive force and thus to the interests of the ruling classes, emphasized Coben.[Think about NCLB, the achivement is for what?] For Gramsci, therefore, education interweaves with the maintenance of hegemony. He put:
Every relationship of 'hegemony' is necessarily an educational relationship and occurs not only within a nation, between the various forces that comprise it, but in the entire international and world filed, between complexes of national and continental civilizations (FSPN:157, cited on the page 17)
Putting forward the notion that "all men are intellectuals" (SPN:9) as his theory of the intellectuals, Gramsci pointed out that their intellectual function should be developed through experience and education, noted Coben. Here rejected is the idea that intellectuals are independent of class and social context. Instead, Gramsci conceptualized organic intellectuals as opposed to traditional. Organic intellectuals are rooted in their class and perform an educational role to organize the class hegemony over society, whereas traditional intellectuals are intellectuals of the ruling class. Gramsci stressed that despite the difficulty of producing working-class organic intellectuals, the creation of such intellectuals was key to social revolution.
[Reading this passage, I think of the notion of elite professors OP students mentioned. Here the elites are far from the students' class, yet the instructors are seen as elite intellectuals, which can be categorized as traditional intellectuals according to Gramsci, although the two concepts, traditional and organic, are not mutually exclusive in Gramsci (Quintin, 1980; Coben, as cited on 19.)]
p. 22
Coben sharply pointed out that for Gramsci, the organization of hegemony of a subjugated class was key to opposing the ideological structure of a dominant class. The process of organizing the hegemony suggests Gramsci's idea of adult education. One of the activities that Gramsci empathized for the organization was a forming cultural group through journalism. This cultural group "aims to spread an integral conception of the world through various journalistic activities" (SCW: 430, as cited 23-24). Defining this type of journalism as "integral" one, Gramsci elaborated:
[Integral journalism is] one that seeks not only to satisfy all the needs (of a given category) of its public, but also to create and develop these needs, to arouse its public and progressively enlarge it. (SCW: 408, as cited on 23)
In his term, culture means "thinking well, whatever one thinks, and therefore acting well, whatever one does" (SCW:25). Here, culture means praxis, informed action (Freire, Pedagogy of the oppressed). More clearly, he wrote, "Study and culture for us are none other than the theoretical consciousness of our immediate and supreme goals, and the way in which we will succeed in translating them into action" (FSPN: xxxiii, cited 33).
For Gramsci, education is organizing culture and this organized culture becomes hegemonic. He summarized the tasks of cultural organizations:
"Its task is to offer a forum for a through and popular discussion of the economic and moral problems which life brings or will bring to the attention of the proletariat" (SCW: 23, cited 32)
His criticism on philanthropic institutions for adult education further illuminates his perspective on adult education:
[We need] the detailed work of discussing and investigating problems, work in which everybody participates, to which everybody contributes, in which everybody is both master and disciple" (SCW: 25, cited 34)
This perspective also suggests that the process of education is similar to journalism.
Coben concludes Gramsci's perspective on education:
"The education of adults, broadly conceived in Gramscian terms, is a means through which revolutionary organic intellectuals may be developed and equipped to undertake the crucial, painstaking work of organizing revolutionary hegemony" (p. 50).
//////
FSPN: Further selections from the Prison Notebooks/Antonio Gramsci, edited and translated by D. Boothman. Mineapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press (1995)
SPN: Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci, edited and translated by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith. London: Lawrence and Wishart (1971)
SCW: Selections from cultural writings. edited by D. Forgas and G. Nowell Smith, translated by W. Boelhouwer. London: Lawrence and Wishart. 1985
///
Paulo Friere: Education as Political (53-114)
His ideas of adult education are well explored in two articles, "The adult literacy process as cultural action for freedom" and "Cultural action and consicentization" published by Harvard Educational Review (1970) and later as a book titled Cultural Action for Freedom (Harvard University Press, 1970).
Coben noted that for Freire, conscientization is the aim of education and the concepts of praxis and dialogue are its two principles. Freire wrote, "Consicentization represents the development of the awakening of critical awareness" (EPF: 19). He wrote that typically poor people are concerned only with survival and fall prey to magical explanations because they do not understand true causality (EPT). He argued that this tendency is characteristic of people trapped in the "culture of silence", which Coben explains, "unable to discover and articulate their view of the world and therefore unable to act to change it" (p. 73). For Freire, the goal of conscientization is characterized by "the depth in the interpretation of problems; by the substitution of causal principles for magical explanations; by the testing of one's "findings" and by openness to revision..."(EPF:18) In fact, this is what researchers try to do. Thereby, Freire suggested that concientization, the aim of education, should enable individuals to undertake these perspectives of doing research in their everyday life. For Freire, in other words, the conscientization is the process of interrogation and dialogical forms of life (EPF:18, as cited 75).
Limitations of Freire's concept of oppression, in particular, from the feminist perspective, Coben argued:
"Lacking an understanding of power, his model of oppression is just too simple and indiscriminate to accommodate the multifaceted and contradictory nature of differential power relationships in terms of gender, class or any other social category" (p. 97)
Coben takes a critical stance on Frerie's pedagogical process, criticizing the divisional pedagogical relationship: "the learner is constructed at the outset as passive, silent, ignorant, unaware, inexperienced, possibly fearful but acquiescent. By contrast, from the outset the educator is active, in control, free, aware, experienced, wise, fearless and self-sacrificing" (112-113). Further, Coben described this relationship as a sexualized one, the educator cast as the male lover and the learner as the female virginal beloved. This interpretation led her to the following conclusion of the concept of conscientization:
"This feminization and, to an extent, also, infantilization of the learner is the nub of the inequality at the heart of the Freirian pedagogical relationship. Conscientization, which Freire conceives as an act of love, is revealed as at best a consensual but unequal coupling, at worst an invasion, a rape" (p. 113). [ I would argue that participatory research should overcome this dichotomy by achieving mutual goals through research. Researchers/Facilitators are not an educator. This situation can lead to another form, more liberating, less assumptive, of adult education.]
Criticizing his universalist concept of oppression devoid of consistent class analysis as well as patriarchal leardership for revolution, Coben raised an essential question: "It is not enough to say that political leaders, or educators, must commit class suicide and devote their lives to the people. Without a clear political framework such action is a sacrifice, but to what end?" (p. 113)
///
EPF: Education: the practice of freedom, Writers and Readers, 1976.
CAF: Cultural action for freedom, Penguin, 1972.
///
Gramsci and Freire: apologias, critiques and interpretations (pp. 148-202)
I also would argue whether the literacy program that Freire advocated systematically leads to conscientization, self-reflection and criticality. Brian Street (CHECK OUT Literacy Theory and Practices (1984) Cambridge University Press.) Criticizing the "great divide" between literacy and illiteracy, he argued that self-reflection and critical thought were seen in nonliterate societies, undermining Freire's assmuption of literacy as a ground base for critical enlightenment (cited p 154).
Quoting Kidd and Kumar (1981) and Kidd and Byram (1982), Coben cautioned pseudo-Freirian adult education, which substitutes a concern with poverty with a liberatory concern with oppression, which corresponds to the argument that M.D. James (1990, Demystifying literacy: reading, writing, and the struggle for liberation, Convergence, 23(1), 14-26) made.
Coben noted the link between participatory research and adult education, quoting Ted Jackson (1981, Convergence, The influence of Gramsci on Adult Eduction, Convergence, 14(3), 81-6). Here, tracing participatory research around the world, he interpreted participatory research as an attempt to apply Gramsci's work to the field of adult education.
Coben read Peter Mayo's (1994, Synthesizing Gramsci and Freire: possibilities for a theory of radical adult education, Int'l journal of lifelong education, 13(2), 125-48) analysis of Gramsci and Freire as a foundation for a radical theory of adult education.
Again, Coben took on critical stance on Freire, arguing:
Freire's vision of the oppressed as humanized (civilized? redeemed?) through a process of conscinetization initiated and controlled by a born again leader/educator, motivated by love, may be inspirational for those who identify with the educator/leader/lover, but what of the other, the oppressed, who has not sought--any may not want--the educator's love or leadership?
Gramsci and Freire: Radical Heroes? (203-223)
Finally, Coben asked whether we need heros for adult education for social change and urged us to go beyond "hero worship" (p. 222) toward a politics of adult education engaging with purpose, process and content within the context of social change. In this light, she suggests that raising intellectuals "to practice their capacity for self-reflection" (p. 222) is a more sound purpose of educational activity in contrast with revolutionary commitment.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
The Practice of Qualitative Research
Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber & Patricia Leavy. (2006). Sage Publications.
Chapter 4. In-Depth Interview (pp. 119-145)
[I chose this chapter to discuss among the VTW research group members. It is written in a plain yet engaging manner with some examples to illustrate the authors' points.]
The authors introduce the significance of in-depth or intensive interview a common method for qualitative research. In comparison with quantitative interview, they argue, qualitative interviews, which are often involved with in-depth interview, should be "knowledge-producing conversation" (p. 128) based upon reciprocal relationships between interviewees and interviewers as well as a sense of shared authority, which regards interviewees as experts.
Similarly, defining the qualitative interview as "co-creation of meaning" (p. 134), the authors call for reflexivity among researchers. In their term:
"The heart of the qualitative interview requires much reflexivity, that is, sensitivity to the important 'situational' dynamics between the researcher and researched that can impact the creation of knowledge" (p. 135)
In the discussion of dealing with difference between researchers and researched, the authors talk about the notions of insiders and outsiders. They argue that one's status as insider/outsider is fluid and prone to change in the course of research. In general, they agree, insiders can bring much in-depth data, yet state the advantage of being an outsider:
"By not belong to a specific group, you may be viewed as more unbiased by your respondent. Likewise, you may be more likely to ask things that you would otherwise take for granted as "shared knowledge" and in fact learn that your participation have their own way of viewing a given issue." (p. 140)
The authors suggest to be mindful of the importance of difference between researchers and researched.
In the discussion of analysis and interpretation of interview data, the authors emphasize the importance of negative cases that do not fit the overall problems, as they are often the most informative. As a way of triangulating data, they suggest to try hard to disprove a researcher's presumed ideas.
Chapter 4. In-Depth Interview (pp. 119-145)
[I chose this chapter to discuss among the VTW research group members. It is written in a plain yet engaging manner with some examples to illustrate the authors' points.]
The authors introduce the significance of in-depth or intensive interview a common method for qualitative research. In comparison with quantitative interview, they argue, qualitative interviews, which are often involved with in-depth interview, should be "knowledge-producing conversation" (p. 128) based upon reciprocal relationships between interviewees and interviewers as well as a sense of shared authority, which regards interviewees as experts.
Similarly, defining the qualitative interview as "co-creation of meaning" (p. 134), the authors call for reflexivity among researchers. In their term:
"The heart of the qualitative interview requires much reflexivity, that is, sensitivity to the important 'situational' dynamics between the researcher and researched that can impact the creation of knowledge" (p. 135)
In the discussion of dealing with difference between researchers and researched, the authors talk about the notions of insiders and outsiders. They argue that one's status as insider/outsider is fluid and prone to change in the course of research. In general, they agree, insiders can bring much in-depth data, yet state the advantage of being an outsider:
"By not belong to a specific group, you may be viewed as more unbiased by your respondent. Likewise, you may be more likely to ask things that you would otherwise take for granted as "shared knowledge" and in fact learn that your participation have their own way of viewing a given issue." (p. 140)
The authors suggest to be mindful of the importance of difference between researchers and researched.
In the discussion of analysis and interpretation of interview data, the authors emphasize the importance of negative cases that do not fit the overall problems, as they are often the most informative. As a way of triangulating data, they suggest to try hard to disprove a researcher's presumed ideas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
