In theory, I am very open to the idea of applying critical pedagogy in my classes: students learn from each other by challenging and responding to student generated ideas; students learn to organise and develop their thoughts to better express themselves; materials are created collaboratively; teacher-student interactions are cooperative; and all participants can engage in critical reflection.
Practically speaking, even though I have the benefit of curriculum autonomy, there are some glaring obstacles with this that make me hesitant to even try.
First of all, there are the institutional constraints. I teach conversational English at a public high school with size range from 31-38 and only two of these classes are organised by English ability. I teach independently, without a co-teacher to assist with translation. My objective is to get students engaged in English by using their existing knowledge to communicate. My students are all eager to speak and get involved, even the shy ones, as long as they have been given a chance to prepare beforehand. But there is a large discrepancy in focus and ability which means I can spend a lot of time assisting lower level students who may otherwise get distracted.
Wait a minute...
So, I had a few critiques of Shin's methods and details of how they would be difficult to apply to my own situation and I just realised that I am completely missing the point. Any critique I had could be countered with an alternative option. Also, with any approach or method, the same fundamental problems exist: class size, different levels, inability to articulate ideas accurately and so on.
Shin gives solid examples of how to apply critical pedagogy in two particular contexts with what appear to be quite high level students, and if I have difficulty with these methods, the onus is on me, as the teacher, to adapt and find the right fit for my own students and teaching context.
I guess, if I am being honest with myself, the biggest barrier is my own apprehension. There is a lot of unfamiliar work involved in changing the way a class operates, how participants interact with each other, the individual expectations for the class, and using critical discussion to develop language abilities. If I attempt this, what should I expect as a result? Would I be satisfied with that result, for myself and my students? Would the cost outweigh the benefits of what I currently do?
I enjoyed reading your reflections. There are very real barriers to establishing critical practices. I think you make a great insight when you notice that a lot of these barriers remain no matter what kind of approach we take to teaching. One of my solutions to the 'intimidating' factor (and it's there, I think, for everyone considering these ideas), is to remove the label "critical" from my mind when planning lessons. Instead of trying to be a "critical pedagogue" or planning "critical" lessons, I try to respond to what I perceive my students' needs to be. I believe that much of what we're comfortable with as teachers is based on habits. So yes, shifting gears and trying to play with the ideas we talk about this semester may be a bit of a jolt. Though rethinking our habitual ways of approaching our lessons takes a bit of time and energy, it's certainly not impossible. Especially if we avoid the imposing and intimidating "critical" label. Just do your thing and keep pushing forward....
ReplyDelete