Peter McLaren: Critical Pedagogy: A Look at the Major Concepts Response

Peter McLaren and Critical Pedagogy…was not the easiest author or subject to read and comprehend. There were definitely a lot of questions posed, and I feel as though I never really got an answer to any of them. I am anxious to hear other classmate’s responses to this article so we can discuss, and hopefully I can better comprehend.

Though I ended up having a lot of questions, I did learn quite a about the different kinds of knowledge. I found the section on “Forms of Knowledge” interesting and enjoyed my introduction to emancipatory knowledge. I agree with the idea of taking into account a person’s social relationships and how that “distort[s] and manipulate[s] relations of power and privilege” (McLaren 64) especially in relation to education and understanding students. Too often, it seems like these factors are ignored when educators are discussing ideals or standards for students as a whole. Just this weekend I was discussing the CCSS’s with two current teachers. One is a high school teacher and the other a Special Education teacher at the elementary school level. They are in favor of the standards but think some of them to be unrealistic standards for the types of kids they are teaching (in certain ways).

A complaint I do have about this article is that it would have been helpful to have more modern day examples. When McLaren was explaining the importance of subculture and what it can be used for, “subculture movements reflect a crisis within dominant society, rather than a unified mobilization against it” (66) he tried to use hippies as an example. I would have liked to have had another more recent example to help define a subculture movement even more. This article (from my understanding) was published in 2009 and there are plenty other examples that could help articulate the importance of subculture for a reader requiring additional explanation.

A compliment I have of the article was the section on ideology. I thought McLaren did an exceptional job in this section explaining ideology and how it relates to hegemony. He clearly lays out the negatives and positives of ideology which seems to be clearer than other sections of his work.

Overall, this was not my favorite article to read. I think I actually took away more reading Paulo Freire’s work than McLaren’s. But, it could just mean I need some help understanding through discussion.