Critical pedagogy is concerned with reforming schools to achieve greater equity and excellence for culturally diverse groups and to promote a form of education that is more in line with democratic principles (Gay, 1995). Hence, critical pedagogy recognises that major problems of inequality exist within schooling. As indicated in the literature review, there exists a notable gap between the general performance of Deaf learners and their hearing peers. One of the essential components of critical pedagogy is therefore to analyse the disparities in educational opportunities and their consequences for culturally marginalised groups (Gay, 1995). In other words, the critical research paradigm is concerned explicitly with taking the sides of the oppressed or marginalised in ending societal inequality (Mertens, 2000). Giroux (1997) reiterates that ‘genuine pedagogical practice demands a commitment to social transformation in solidarity with subordinate and marginalised groups’.
Although critical pedagogy recognises issues such as inequality and oppression through political, economic and ethical factors, it believes in reforming these structures by challenging the underlying values and cultural ethos. Gay (1995, p. 157) describes it as the ‘pedagogy of possibility’ that offers a strong sense of hope through potential change. Denzin (2003, p. 229) describes the hope in critical pedagogy as one that ‘confronts and interrogates cynicism, the belief that change is not impossible or is too costly.’ Hence, the imperative in critical pedagogy is therefore to design and implement educational practices that are more equilitarian and effective for culturally diverse population (Gay, 1995). As indicated in the literature review, Franco et al (2007) findings confirmed that a problem
solving curriculum has the potential as an educational tool to restore equality in mathematical performance, provided that teachers in lower achieving schools are willing to embrace the change. Giroux (1992) attests that critical education operates on two basic assumptions in order to curb undemocratic social and cultural reproduction in schools. Firstly, it is a language of critique. Simply put, critical pedagogy questions presuppositions. It is the element of questioning contained in this assumption that aligns critical pedagogy with radical education. Giroux (1992, p.14) argues that radical education ‘doesn’t refer to a discipline or body of knowledge. It suggests a particular kind of practice and a particular posture of questioning of institutions and received assumptions’. Secondly, the goal of critical education is human empowerment. Giroux (1992, p.15) defines empowerment as the ‘ability to think and act critically’ with reference to oneself and to society for the sake of social betterment. In other words, education needs to bring people to a point where they know how to question themselves and the social structures in which they functions. Giroux (1992, p.15) contends this paradigm is also radical in nature when contrasted to more dominant education philosophies that teach people how to ‘adapt to social forms rather than critically interrogate them’.
Within the framework of critique and human empowerment, teachers assume particular roles. Giroux (1992, p. 20) argues that critical pedagogy requires teachers to become ‘transformative intellectuals’. Giroux (1992) elobarates that the notion of ‘being a transformative individual’ implicate that teachers are aware of their own theoretically perspectives and are able to translate these into skillful practices within the classroom. Moreover, teachers offer their own theories and beliefs to others in order to stimulate debate and critical enquiry. And, teachers play an active role in curriculum shaping and development. Stated differently, teachers are expected to critically consider the relationship between culture and learning and then to change the conditions under which they work. The critical paradigm contends that schools routinely perpetuate inequalities amongst marginalised groups
through underlying power relations, messages contained in the overt and hidden curricula, and through a lack of critical teaching and student empowerment (Gay, 1995). Hence, it is in combining a qualitative authoethnographical account together with critical pedagogy that one creates a space from which to make the hidden visible and the subtle more overt through reflexive practice. From within such a space one can take more meaningful measures to address inequality in mathematical performance within a school system.
In making the above considerations, the critical research paradigm requires that teachers look beyond surface reality (Parry, 2007) as ‘surface reality is full of ideology, myth, distortion, and false appearances’ (Neuman, 2000, p.79). In other words, teachers need to examine beyond the immediate observable experienced aspects of schooling to uncover deeper structures or unobservable mechanisms that hinder Deaf learners’ from realising their potential in mathematics.
In exploring the deeper strata of a cultures and schools ‘underlying power structures that may not be conscious to people yet have influence on the production of social reality’ are likely to emerge (Parry, 2007, p.131). The ‘deeper’ social structures often represent oppressive power relations. Oppression is legitimised through ideology and maintained through political and economic power (Truman et. al. 2000). Subsequently, any insight or knowledge generated through research is used to engage oppressive social structures to advance the emancipation of the oppressed (Truman et. al. 2000).
One of the deeper underlying power structures embedded in traditional pedagogy is the ‘banking approach to education’ (Freire, 1994). Freire (1994) describes the banking philosophy as one in which teachers assume the role of ‘depositing’ knowledge into the learners. In this context, teachers ‘own’ education and transmit information they deem relevant to the learners, which the learners then passively receive. Since no critical thinking is required, Freire (1994) posits that the banking
approach leads to indoctrination, passivity and a submergence of the consciousness of the oppressed. Moreover, the passive acceptance of ideology facilitates the reproduction of oppressive structures in society through the mode of schooling. It is therefore a technique used by the dominant power to maintain the status quo without encountering significance resistance.
Hence, Freire (1994) argues that true transformation at school level requires that the banking approach be changed to a problem posing approach. The problem posing approach allows learners to view reality from multiple perspectives. It creates a setting for articulating and testing different ideas about society and the invidual’s role in it (Nieto, 2004). In other words, the world is not seen as a static reality into which students must ‘fit’. Rather, students are encouraged to see reality as a ‘problem’ that can be solved or transformed. As explored in the literature review [Section 2.2.2.3], the problem posing approach requires a reformulation of the traditional vertical relationship in which the teacher teaches students to a horizontal relationship where the teacher becomes a student with the student. Stated differently, students and teachers – learn from and teach one another and thus grow together. Stated differently, Freire (1994, p. 93) argues that ‘authentic education is not carried on by “A” for “B”, or “A” about “B”, but “A” with “B”.
In order for “A” to learn with “B” a specific type of discourse needs to be practiced in the classroom. Freire (1994) argues that in critical pedagogy discourse is fundamental to social transformation. Thus for Freire, the success of critical pedagogical practices depends on the ability to communicatively engage learners in educational experiences. The discourse encourages learners to recognise, name and address issues in society including asymmetrical power relations. Freire (1994) argued that problem posing education allows the true consciousness of people to emerge because it depends on communication, recognizes the relationship between people and the world and encourages inquiry. When these conditions are met, transformation is most likely to occur.
The reform mathematics introduced by this study embodies the characteristics of ‘problem posing’ education as detailed by Freire (1994). In the context of this research, Deaf learners are considered a linguistic minority that are marginalised and constrained by situational factors [See Section 2.5]. Ultimately, the researcher wants to make contributions to critical theory by creating a vision of possible mathematical equity between Deaf and hearing learners. In line with the philosophy of critical theory the aim of this research is to empower Deaf learners to orientate towards reform mathematics by engaging them in dialogue. The sample of learners that were selected for this study is discussed in the following section.