Week 3 Response 2: Being Critical of Critical Pedagogies

The article begins by reiterating the concerns we discussed in class, namely that of theory v. practice.  Many have come to the concensus that theorists are too distanced and removed from the real world contexts in which teaching occurs.  Why, then, do we rely so heavily upon these sources?  Pennycook also raises the issue of politics within the publishing realm by reminding us of the heavy-handed influence of English in the TESOL and applied linguistic arena and beyond (330).  I think these two points are interesting introductions to what Pennycook later goes on to explain: critical pedagogy.  This notion of critical awareness is not only applicable to our teaching practices, but also important to us as consumers of published scholarly work.  As I have stated in precious posts, we must always be challenging and analyzing the sources of our information--whether it is personal bias or results of our research or education.

Later in the article, Pennycook argues that "critical approaches to TESOL are fundamentally political" and "must necessarily take up certain positions and stances" (334).  He also raises the concern that 'politics' is synonymous with 'leftist' and how this may stigmatize the framework or pin teachers against one another.  I believe this is a key concept to the "transformative intellectual" philosophy and presents a controversial dilemma in thought: how do we define 'leftist' ideals, and are they always best as the basis for educational practice?  Many times, the issues involved are polemic, and the subject becomes murky as we attempt to prescribe what is worth learning in our curricula and what is not.  On a related note, Pennycook asserts that critical thinking should not be confused with critical approaches to TESOL.  However, I personally do not see the difference.  He claims that "[c]ritical thinking is generally an apolitical approach" (334), but I disagree.  How can critical thinking be apolitical?  On what do we base our questioning if not on political matters?  How can we critically analyze a text without being political?  Critical thinking involves considering all sides to an issue and stepping outside of the box--so wouldn't we automatically begin thinking about 'political' topics.  To me, everything is political.  That's just the way I see the world.

One of the most resounding quotes from the article was the following: "A critical approach to TESOL is more than arranging the chairs in a circle and discussing social issues" (338).  How often do we do just that and call it collaborative learning?  I doubt that I'm the only guilty one.  A professor of mine once told me that most "discussion" in the classroom is actually just the teacher prodding the students with predetermined questions to gain a prefabricated response.  I find this largely to be true, but also am curious to know exactly how we can promote true, bottom-up discussion in our classrooms?  The article does a great job at pointing out the problem, but I find it does little to offer a solution or practical suggestions for teachers wanting to take that next step.  What can we do as instructors, and what role does "teacher intervention" play in the critical approach to TESOL?  Personally, I am a big fan of Paolo Freire's work and the critical pedagogy framework, but by attempting to avoid methodology, fails to give teachers concrete examples of how to achieve its transformative goals.