28. Sociologies of Education
Paper
Lost Opportunities for Critical Thinking in Social Studies Education. Post-and Decolonial Interruptions and Possibilities for Epistemological Diversity
Mari Jore1, Kristin Eriksen2
1University of Agder, Norway; 2University of South-eatsern Norway
Presenting Author: Jore, Mari;
Eriksen, Kristin
The recent curriculum reform in Norway brought critical thinking about power relations to the fore, establishing this as a «core element» in social studies education (The Norwegian directorate of Education and Training, 2020). Previous analyses have argued that Norwegian social studies curriculum promote a «selected critical thinking» (Børhaug, 2014), that may contribute to obscuring the reproduction of racist and nationally exceptionalist archives of knowledge (Eriksen, 2021; Jore, 2022). Of particular significance is the absence of Norway`s colonial history related to the colonization of Sápmi (Eriksen, 2018). Furthermore, this is interrelated with how race, racism and whiteness are currently dismissed as relevant analytical concepts for understanding Norwegian society today, manifested in educational discourses (Fylkesnes, 2018).
The aim of this paper is to explore how the ignorance in imaginaries concerning Norwegian history and society inform and shape the options for critical thinking in social studies. How can the acknowledgement of Norways colonial legacy contribute towards better understandings of power relations in todays` society? Can this strategic exploration of the “dark sides” of history and sociability be done without depriving any sense of hope for the future with the students? The analytical framework for this paper is based on post- and decolonial perspectives, making possible analyses of coloniality. As Quijano (2000) describes, colonialism did not end with historical colonialism based on territorial occupation. It installed enduring power and knowledge structures known as coloniality. Coloniality is thus a full dependence of the models of thinking, making, and interpreting the world based on the norms created and imposed by/in Western modernity. Our research question is thus: How can post- and decolonial perspectives help analyze and inform critical thinking in social studies?
We apply empirical examples, described as “telling cases” (Andreotti, 2011), to discuss central theoretical and didactical insights. The empirical base for the article is four such cases, derived from two doctoral studies investigating social studies education at level 5-10 (Eriksen, 2021; Jore, 2022). The analysis of these cases reveal that critical thinking is displayed and present in the classrooms, not least in the students` abilities to ask critical and creative questions. At the same time, we argue that many opportunities for critical thinking remain lost related to the lack of acknowledgement of coloniality.
A variety of scholarships shed light on how the significance of colonial legacy is made invisible in the Nordics (Lóftsdottir & Jensen, 2012), but implications for education are little explored. This article's objective is to explore what post- and decolonial perspectives may contribute to curriculum and educational practices, particularly concerning critical thinking. As projects for critical thinking, post- and decolonial are indebted to Saidian critiques of power and knowledge (1995). The approaches highlight systematical absences and sanctioned ignorances in narratives about history and society (Spivak, 1988), ambivalences, and dismissal of western modernity as an alleged universal epistemological and political project (Santos, 2018). Post- and decolonial analyses share the contestation of the colonial world and knowledge production established with and through European colonialism and an emphasis on understanding the emergence of modernity in the historical contexts of colonialism, imperialism, and slavery. However, the theoretical traditions also hold distinctions. It has been suggested as a difference that postcolonial critiques focus more on agents of colonial cultures, while the world-system critiques of the modernity/coloniality school emphasize structures of capital accumulation and injustice (Bhambra, 2014). In this paper, we acknowledge the differences and internal theoretical debates, we apply tools from both strands of theory that we see as particularly relevant for analyzing and informing educational discourses and practices. Hence, we apply the concept “analyses of coloniality” throughout the article.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis article engages in post- and decolonial critiques, which imply a seeing and reading “against the grain.” A central tool is engaging the sociology of absences (Santos, 2018), entailing uncovering, and exploring knowledge that is hidden, tacit, and taken for granted. This type of reading can be described as critical hermeneutics, where researchers “inject critical social theory into the hermeneutical circle to facilitate an understanding of the hidden structures and tacit cultural dynamics that insidiously inscribe social meanings and values” (Kincheloe & Maclaren, 2003, p. 447). The methodological approach in this article was further informed by the «telling case», in which validity is related to the explanatory power of the case to make obscure theoretical relationships apparent (Andreotti, 2011). From this point of view, it is more interesting to focus on telling cases that can work to illuminating analytical insights, rather than typical cases aggregated across a material. We applied this methodology in combination with colonial discourse analysis (Said, 1995). The basis for selecting a telling case is its explanatory power that is, the extent to which it articulates a “[…] connection between the production of knowledge about the self and Other, and their implications in terms of the reproduction of unequal relations of power and possibilities for more ethical social relations” (Andreotti, 2011, p. 91)
The four empirical cases analyzed in this article, are derived from two exploratory doctoral studies conducted in Norway in the period 2018-2022. Following critical ethnographical perspectives (Elliott & Culhane, 2017; Kincheloe et al., 2018), the material was established using several different methods, including small-scale fieldwork and observations of lectures, semi-structured interviews with students, teachers and teacher students, and analysis of national curriculums, textbooks, and teaching materials. Eriksen (2021) explored the significance of coloniality in knowledge production in citizenship education at level 5-7, in Eastern Norway, applying decolonial perspectives. Eriksens` fieldwork was conducted in 2017-2018, and included observations of lectures, interviews with teachers (21) and students (19), and teaching interventions. Jore (2022) examined constructions of Norwegianness and Western-ness in social studies education at junior high school level 8-9, in Western Norway, using a postcolonial lens. Her fieldwork lasted from April through October 2016. Jore followed three classes on level 8 and 9, observing 44 hours of teaching. After the observations, Jore conducted interviews with students (36).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe analyzed cases reveal how valuable opportunities for critical thinking about society are lost through the lack of acknowledgement of coloniality. The analysis of the telling cases illustrates that the imaginary of national exceptionalism and the hegemony of modern-western epistemologies are deeply embedded within educational discourses. We thus argue that the invisibilities of coloniality serve to (re)produce social and racial inequality and epistemic monocultures and injustice in curriculum and teaching practices, despite good intentions. When unacknowledged, coloniality may absolve educational institutions of their ethical and pedagogical responsibilities to disrupt unjust and unsustainable social relations and obstruct critical conversations about processes that systemically reproduce discursive and political inequalities. Based on insights from post- and decolonial theories, we suggest that the results implicate the need for a critical thinking about curriculum and practice that includes the following: Critical thinking with, rather than simply about, coloniality; critical thinking about episteme (cf. Foucault, 2006), and how knowledge is produced; acknowledging knowledge as political and situated; border thinking (Mignolo, 2012) and emphasizing ambivalence and ambiguity; creative and imaginative thinking, inspired by the decolonial “otherwise” (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018), that allow for a greater epistemological diversity.
ReferencesAndreotti, V. (2011a). Actionable postcolonial theory in education. Palgrave.
Bhambra, G. K. (2014). Postcolonial and decolonial dialogues. Postcolonial studies, 17(2), 115-121.
Børhaug, K. (2014). Selective critical thinking: A textbook analysis of education for critical thinking in Norwegian social studies. Policy Futures in Education, 12(3), 431–444. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2014.12.3.431
Chakrabarty, D. (2008). Provincializing Europe: postcolonial thought and historical difference. Princeton.
Elliott & D. Culhane (2017). A different kind of ethnography: Imaginative practices and creative methodologies. University of Toronto Press.
Eriksen, K.G. (2018). Teaching about the other in primary level social studies: The Sami in Norwegian textbooks. Journal of Social Science Education, 17(2), 57-67. https://doi.org/10.4119/UNIBI/jsse-v17-i2-1697.
Eriksen, K.G. (2021). “We usually don’t talk that way about Europe...” Interrupting the coloniality of Norwegian citizenship education. Ph.D. dissertation. University of South-eastern Norway.
Fylkesnes, S. (2018). Whiteness in teacher education research discourses: A review of the use and meaning making of the term cultural diversity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71, 24-33.
Kincheloe, J., & Maclaren, P. (2003). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research - Theories and issues (2nd ed., pp. 433–489). SAGE.
Kincheloe, J., McLaren, P., Steinberg, S., & Monzó, L. (2018). Critical pedagogy and qualitative research: Advancing the bricolage. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 235–260). SAGE.
Loftsdóttir, K., & Jensen, L. (Eds.). (2012). Whiteness and postcolonialism in the Nordic region: Exceptionalism, migrant others and national identities. Routledge.
Jore, M. K. Konstruksjoner av norskhet og vestlighet i samfunnsfaget i ungdomsskolen – En postkolonial studie av muligheter for identifikasjon i samfunssfagsundervisningen. PhD. Dissertation. Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.
Mignolo, W. (2012). Local histories/global designs: Coloniality, subaltern knowledges, and border thinking. Princeton University Press.
Mignolo, W., & Walsh, C. (2018). On decoloniality: Concepts, analytics, praxis. Duke University Press.
Quijano, A. (2000). Coloniality of power and Eurocentrism in Latin America. International Sociology, vol. 15(2), p. 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0268580900015002005
Said, E. (1995). Orientalism. Penguin books.
Santos, B. d. S. (2018). The end of the cognitive empire: The coming of age of epistemologies of the South. Duke University Press.
Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern Speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271-235). University of Illinois Press.
The Norwegian Directorate of Education and Training (2020). Social studies curriculum. The Norwegian Government.
28. Sociologies of Education
Paper
Learning Whiteness: Materialities, Knowledge And Affect
Sophie Rudolph, Jessica Gerrard
University of Melbourne, Australia
Presenting Author: Rudolph, Sophie
Globally, we are seeing a resurgence of white nationalism and white supremacist extremism that is becoming more mainstream, such as in recent European election results. In schooling, this has been seen in the voting against Critical Race Theory informing curriculum or being taught in schools in the USA and the UK (Gatwiri & Anderson, 2021). And at the same time interconnected movements for Indigenous sovereignty, Black Lives Matter, refugee justice and anti-racism offer a reckoning with multiple forms of racial domination and injustice. In the project from which this paper is drawn (Sriprakash et al, 2022) we aimed to understand how contemporary white domination is part of a long and enduring system, rather than something new or just recently noticed.
This paper takes as its focus the relationship between the settler colonial state and education (both formal education institutions and informal education practices). While focused on the context of Australia, we see this paper as connected to analyses of colonial orders globally. Indeed, our paper is premised on the need for dialogue across contexts on questions of colonialism and race and informed by Goldberg’s (2009) notion of racisms as related and reliant on each other across the globe.
The processes and practices of the settler colonial state are steeped in racial hierarchies, inherited from colonialism and racial capitalism. Taking as a starting point Aileen Moreton-Robinson’s (2015) analysis of the settler colonial state as invested in patriarchal white sovereignty, we examine the efforts made by the settler state to create and uphold Australia as a white possession in the face of unceded Indigenous sovereignty.
Importantly in this project we understand whiteness to be a structural formation, shaped by material interests of racial domination under colonialism and capitalism and constantly negotiated and enlivened through the governance of social and political life (Sriprakash et al, 2022, 14). Thus whiteness in Australia and other British settler colonies is formed through settler colonial networks of social and cultural power. Understanding whiteness in these material, social and cultural terms and as part of a power hierarchy enables awareness of the mutability and contingency of whiteness, that it is not something reducible to a fixed identity or even a physical appearance.
In this paper we present a theoretical framework we have developed to investigate and understand racial dominance in settler colonial contexts and the role of and implications for education. The framework brings together racial capitalism (see Melamed, 2015), epistemologies of white ignorance (see Mills, 2007) and feeling-states (drawing on Ahmed 2004; Kenway & Fahey, 2011; Boler, 1999; Attwood, 2017) along with the theorising of the white possessive (Moreton-Robinson, 2015).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis is a theoretical paper, grounded in post-colonial, de-colonial and critical approaches to theory and theoretical writing. Specifically, our approach is informed by the idea of ‘the otherwise’, as developed for instance by Stein and Andreotti (2018), in that we see the purpose of theoretical work as opening the conditions of possibility for understanding – and responding to – racial dominance in education. In addressing race and racism in education, this has involved the generation of conceptual tools to help understand the construction of dominance. Our approach is premised on the need to build these conceptual resources as a means to then redress white control and power in education. Drawing significantly from Moreton-Robinson (2015) our methodology has involved deep engagement with existing theory alongside cultural and historical analysis.
We use a range of examples from the Australian context and connect these to other British settler colonial contexts, to demonstrate how ‘pedagogies of the state’ (Pykett, 2010) are employed to benefit the settler colonial fiction of white possession and continue a project of racial injustice. Through this we reflect on the international racial relationality (see Goldberg, 2009) between British settler colonial contexts such as Aotearoa New Zealand, Canada, the United States of America and Britain itself in the production of racial domination.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe outcome of this paper is the generation of a conceptual framework that can address racial dominance in education. In the context of Australia, the production of ‘white colonial paranoia’ (Moreton-Robinson, 2015, xxiii) through the unresolved tension of settler colonial governance on unceded Indigenous land engenders, we argue, both formal and informal education practices that bolster white racial dominance. In presenting this multifaceted analytical framework for understanding racial domination in settler states, we show how education operates beyond knowledge and curriculum and how 1) materialities, 2) knowledge and 3) feelings are interdependent in producing and upholding white dominance in settler colonies. While focused in this work on racial dominance in British settler colonies, the three-pronged framework developed has relevance for understanding racial dominance in other contexts, including Europe and its (former) colonies.
Building from this, in the conclusion of this paper we suggest that possibilities for divesting from racial domination could benefit from a reparative justice approach (see Sriprakash 2022). Such an approach, we argue, needs to consider the material, epistemic and affective dimensions of domination in order to divest from domination and work towards educational justice.
ReferencesAhmed, S. (2004). Affective economies. Social Text, 22(2), 117–139.
Attwood, B. (2017). Denial in a Settler Society: The Australian Case. History Workshop Journal, 84, 24–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/hwj/dbx029
Boler, M. (1999). Feeling power: Emotions and education. Routledge.
Gatwiri, K., & Anderson, L. (2021, June 22). The Senate has voted to reject critical race theory from the national curriculum. What is it, and why does it matter? The Conversation. http://theconversation.com/the-senate-has-voted-to-reject-critical-race-theory-from-the-national-curriculum-what-is-it-and-why-does-it-matter-163102
Goldberg, D. T. (2009). Racial comparisons, relational racisms: Some thoughts on method. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32(7), 1271–1282. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870902999233
Kenway, J., & Fahey, J. (2011). Public pedagogies and global emoscapes. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 6(2), 167–179.
Melamed, J. (2015). Racial capitalism. Critical Ethnic Studies, 1(1), 76–85.
Mills, C. W. (2007). White ignorance. In S. Sullivan & N. Tuana (Eds.), Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance (pp. 13–38). State University of New York Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/unimelb/detail.action?docID=3407494
Moreton-Robinson, A. (2015). The White Possessive: Property, Power, and Indigenous Sovereignty. University of Minnesota Press.
Pykett, J. (2010). Citizenship Education and narratives of pedagogy. Citizenship Studies, 14(6), 621–635. https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2010.522345
Sriprakash, A. (2022). Reparations: Theorising just futures of education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 0(0), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2022.2144141
Sriprakash, A., Rudolph, S., & Gerrard, J. (2022). Learning, Whiteness: Education and the Settler Colonial State. Pluto Press.
Stein, S. & Andreotti, V. (2018) What does theory matter?: Conceptualising race critical research. In G. Vass, J. Maxwell, S. Rudolph & K. Gulson (eds.) The Relationality of Race in Education Research (pp. 156-169). London & New York: Routledge
|
