How can we obtain Education Equality for African Americans and the Disabled in Chicago?

https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649219883290

Sociology of Race and Ethnicity 1 –7 © American Sociological Association 2019 DOI: 10.1177/2332649219883290 sre.sagepub.com

Invited Article

In celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Heather Dalmage and Samantha Martinez will reflect on their experiences with liberatory pedagogy in Dalmage’s Introduction to Sociology course. Heather Dalmage, a professor of sociology, attended her first workshop on liberatory pedagogy with Ira Shor almost twenty-five years ago as a student at City University of New York’s Graduate Center, and Samantha Martinez is a Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals student from Mexico and a recent graduate of Roosevelt University with a BA in sociology. Roosevelt University is a small, urban liberal arts institution where 30 percent of its stu- dents are first generation and 45 percent are students of color. Roosevelt University is founded on a mis- sion of social justice and providing opportunities for students who, at that time, were barred from other

universities because of race, gender, and/or religion. In this article, we explore the practice, promise, and contradictions of introducing liberatory practice into a higher education classroom. Freire introduced lib- eratory education in response to the hierarchical transfer of knowledge, “banking” concept of educa- tion that has dominated educational institutions. The banking approach to education demands that stu- dents memorize and repeat top-down “official” knowledge in order to achieve success. Educational

883290 SREXXX10.1177/2332649219883290Sociology of Race and EthnicityDalmage and Martinez research-article2019

1Department of Sociology, Roosevelt University, Chicago, IL, USA

Corresponding Author: Heather M. Dalmage, Department of Sociology, Roosevelt University, 430 S. Michigan Ave., Chicago, IL 60605, USA. Email: [email protected]

Location, Location, Location: Liberatory Pedagogy in a University Classroom

Heather M. Dalmage1 and Samantha A. Martinez1

Abstract In this article, we explore the practice, promise, and contradictions of introducing liberatory practice into a higher education classroom. Freire introduced liberatory education in response to the hierarchical transfer of knowledge, “banking” concept of education that has dominated educational institutions. The banking approach to education demands that students memorize and repeat top-down “official” knowledge in order to achieve success. Liberatory pedagogy holds great hope, but developing a space for liberatory dialogue within the university classroom remains messy and rife with contradictions. Professors interested in liberatory pedagogy must make explicit the contradictions and challenge the multiple ways schools shape students, politically and culturally. We reflect on three different points in the semester as moments of explicit focus on the contradictions of creating liberatory spaces and dialogue within higher education. Location matters in every moment: our social locations shape our experiences, and the location of the classroom within higher education and the shifting locations in the liberatory process include managing the contradictions and possibilities of human liberation. We offer educators wishing to develop liberatory practices some ways of reflecting on and shaping a liberatory space within higher education classrooms through the lens of a professor and student engaged in the process of liberatory dialogue.

Keywords liberatory pedagogy, social locations, sociological imagination, cultural capital, dialogue, Introduction to Sociology

2 Sociology of Race and Ethnicity 00(0)

institutions are structured bureaucratically to pro- mote the agenda of those in power. The structure of the classroom, with desks facing the instructor and priority made standardized testing prep, inhibits stu- dents’ ability to think critically, use their imagina- tions, and create knowledge through dialogue with one another. Because the banking approach to edu- cation is grounded in settler-colonial and neoliberal hierarchies, the use of liberatory or critical pedago- gies grounded in a dialogue in which students and the professor are learning together is “a challenge to existing domination” (Shor and Freire 1987:99). Within classrooms, mechanisms such as grades, requirements, rubrics, and classroom arrangements limit the possibility for liberation. Thus, while lib- eratory pedagogy holds great hope, developing a space for liberatory dialogue within the university classroom remains messy and rife with contradic- tions. Professors interested in liberatory pedagogy must make explicit the contradictions as they “cri- tique, expose, and challenge the manner in which schools impact upon the political and cultural life of students” (Darder 2011:205). We argue that the higher education classroom, with myriad limitations and contradictions, can be intentionally used to cre- ate liberatory spaces built and sustained through dia- logue. It is not until we engage in dialogue that we “seal the act of knowing, which is never individual” (Shor and Freire 1987:4). A liberatory pedagogy built on critical dialogue can help us think about the world and ourselves differently. It challenges domi- nant beliefs and practices, ignites critical conscious- ness, and requires that the professor and students “both have to be learners, both have to be cognitive subjects, in spite of being different” (Shor and Freire 1987:33). Likewise, the dialogue presented here between Heather and Samantha provides a lens into the dialogic process as we critically analyze the con- tradictions embedded in the pursuit of liberation within the context of the neoliberal higher education classroom. In this article, we reflect on three differ- ent points in the semester as moments of explicit focus on the contradictions of creating liberatory spaces and dialogue within higher education. Location matters in every moment: our social loca- tions shape our experiences, and the location of the classroom within higher education and the shifting locations in the liberatory process include managing the contradictions and possibilities of human libera- tion. We offer educators wishing to develop libera- tory practices some ways of reflecting on and shaping a liberatory space within higher education classrooms through the lens of a professor and stu- dent engaged in the process of liberatory dialogue.

In short, we address the content and then model the practice. In the first section, “First Day, an Invitation: Building a Liberatory Space,” we explore the pro- cess of building a space in which trust, empathy, and tools needed to engage in dialogue are developed. In the second section, “Middle of the Semester: Understanding Silence and Finding a Voice,” we consider how to address silence and experience find- ing voice in a liberatory space. And in the third sec- tion, “End of Semester: Cultural Capital as Rules and Resistance,” we address how to help students manage contradictions of living with one foot in the mainstream (able to survive and thrive) and one foot in liberatory spaces (able to resist and thrive); this includes thinking about their future jobs, connection to communities, and responsibility to humanity.

FIRST DAy, An InvITATIOn: BUILDIng A LIBERATORy SPACE In the Introduction to Sociology course, liberatory pedagogy is introduced to students who may be new to higher education and new to sociology and learn- ing about a liberatory pedagogy for the first time. The approach, goals, and ways that students receive the invitation are complex. In this section, Heather and Samantha elaborate how each reflects on the experience in order to make explicit the goals, chal- lenges, and contradictions of the process.

Heather: On the first day of class I have four prominent goals toward creating a liberatory space in the classroom: First, I want students to speak and listen to one another directly: Who are you? What brings you to this class- room? What brings you to college? Second, I want to begin to build a sense of trust by explicitly naming our relationship to one another. I talk about what brings me to the classroom and the power dynamics present in the space, held up through grades and institutional practices, as I experience them. I make explicit and challenge the hierarchi- cal arrangements by asking students: Why are you all sitting, looking forward, allowing me to talk at you? Why don’t you all take over this space, make it yours? I challenge them to think about why they might be will- ing to follow (to varying degrees) what I have laid out in front of them. I ask why they are ‘accepting’ the syllabus without ques- tioning the substance. Third, I express my wish to create a space within the classroom that allows for us to learn from one another.

Dalmage and Martinez 3

I explain that despite myriad challenges (including some classrooms that have anchored tables and chairs) my hope is that we are able to create a liberatory space through our dialogue together, grounded in the readings, our lived experiences, and respect for one another. Fourth, I want stu- dents to begin thinking about our social locations. I talk about what I signify as I enter the classroom: the neoliberal univer- sity, the gatekeeper of the credentials, aca- demic or elite language, and my body—read as white—signifies a history of unearned power and privilege. I am keenly aware of the boundaries that I need to cross in order to connect with students and engage in a liber- atory process. I hope that my approach is in part role modeling the layers we bring to our dialogue with one another.

Samantha: On my first day, I was thankful to be in college, a lifelong dream for me, even as I continued to experience an internal con- flict—my sense of confidence was in con- flict with the self-doubt I always feel when I enter classrooms dominated by white stu- dents and educators. My experiences with white educators and banking education approaches have not been inviting, inclu- sive, or liberating. I was surprised that you began the semester questioning the structure of the classroom and the education system. It made me reflect on how classrooms have not been places for comfortableness or where my voice was respected. I was not used to learning from and with my class- mates, instead I had been taught to view my peers as my competitors for college admis- sion and scholarships. Moreover, as a first- generation, undocumented, student of color, I had learned how to excel within the public education system; success was measured by obedience, good grades, and the ability to take multiple choice exams. So, when you introduced the idea of creating a liberatory space and questioned our roles in the class- room and purpose of education, I felt over- whelmed. I knew how to succeed by the standards set up in the educational system, now you were asking us to move without a map toward success. You were basically asking us to trust you and be a part of a learning method we had not engaged in before. I thought about the sacrifices my parents made for me, and knew I could not

fail, so on that first day, I resisted your invi- tation. As an immigrant, female student of color, I needed time to process what it meant to be educated, liberated, and successful and the fear I felt even thinking about veering from my path.

Heather: I think about the experiences students bring to the classroom and how my invita- tion is heard. I watch students closely; I use humor and make comments that show I wel- come and want to know more about the stu- dents’ experiences and ideas. Generally, on that first day, students are rather silent—yet we know that silence is not quiet. Listening to your discomfort, Samantha, helps me to understand the complexities of silence for many students. Unfortunately, classrooms tend to be structured (physically and peda- gogically) to keep students silent. Like you, students know how to succeed in the tradi- tional educational system—they bank knowledge, memorize words and ideas to regurgitate on demand. While knowing how to work within the system may provide a sense of comfort and perhaps, a sense of control, the process of education in that sys- tem also reproduces hegemonic power rela- tions that make human liberation antithetical to classroom learning (Freire 1970, 1992, 1998; Shor and Freire 1987). Given the lack of social support in our society, and the absolute necessity for students to find a way to support themselves in the future, the fear of “veering” from the official meritocratic system is understandable. I am not surprised that my invitation is met with skepticism, resistance, and silence. I reassure students that I want them to achieve their dreams and I want them to understand why they are dreaming what they are dreaming!

Samantha: I remember the first time I spoke in class. We had a student, a Trump supporter, and he said something about immigrants that I felt was offensive and wrong. His words felt like an attack and I needed to respond. I did so and the class went silent. I was not sure if I had crossed a line and was now going to be attacked by more students—I felt exposed. You looked at me and I think you read my sense of vulnerability. You then said to the entire class: “Okay, before we keep discussing this, I want to remind everyone that we are coming from different social locations and we have to respect and really

4 Sociology of Race and Ethnicity 00(0)

listen to each other’s experiences.” By reminding our class that our social locations shape our experiences and outlook of the world, as well as the importance for all of us to be respectful of one another, I felt that my voice was legitimated in the discussion. More importantly, I felt comfortable verbal- izing my opinions and thoughts without fear- ing judgment, because you reminded us that we were all here to learn and build on our understanding of ourselves in the world. Rather than feeling alienated, the classroom became a more comfortable space in which I could be vulnerable and connect with my classmates through dialogue. Still, I noticed some of my classmates remained silent.

MIDDLE OF THE SEMESTER: UnDERSTAnDIng SILEnCE AnD FInDIng A vOICE Faculty can sometimes experience anxiety when they face students who remain silent, refusing to engage in dialogue. Some faculty default to their PowerPoints, convinced that students will not talk. In this section, we address silence as it is enacted and plays out in the liberatory classroom. Central to our discussion is understanding the underlying reasons for silence even when students are invited and encouraged to lead from their experiences and analyses of the readings.

Heather: At some point in every semester, I stop the momentum and query students about silence. What is the silence about? Fear, uncertainty, discomfort? It is hard to imag- ine students do not care. Listening to the brave students willing to tell us about their silence is enlightening. Of course, some stu- dents stay silent about why they are silent. Other students offer explanations including that they are just now becoming aware of the inequality, the social arrangements that reproduce inequality and the overwhelming injustices in the world. They talk about an inability to process the content and emo- tion—they need time. Some students feel intimidated because of their lack of aware- ness, while other students fear exposing themselves as racist or sexist. Many students talk about the years of socialization in the educational system that taught them that good students listen, they do not speak or ask questions. As the professor, I have

become comfortable with silence and the complexities of that silence. I often sit silently with the students, sometimes asking a question, sometimes just waiting. Often, I ask students to turn to the person next to them to discuss a particular point. The one to one dialogue can be less threatening and can give students a chance to think critically before engaging with a larger group. I am conscious that some students need encour- agement to speak, while other students need to learn to make space for other voices in dialogue—they need to learn to listen. This is all part of learning to engage in liberatory dialogue and ask questions. We do not all have the same experiences and knowledge but we can engage in dialogue toward under- standing ourselves, others, and society.

Samantha: As a DACA student, I carry a perva- sive sense of fear—speaking out means bringing attention to myself which can jeop- ardize my safety. Likewise, I felt nervous every time I had to participate in classroom discussions because I had learned that the voices of students of color, like me, were not “fit” for academic settings. However, as we created an inclusive space for dialogue in which we did not have to adhere to dominant institutional practices of banking education, some of my fear in our classroom space was lessened. While the physical structure of our classroom was not ideal, we were able to find ways to sit facing each other. It was humanizing to see everyone and I developed a sense of connection with my classmates, so I felt I could be vulnerable.

Heather: I remember the joy and excitement I felt to hear how you analyzed the world, Samantha! It was not just your insight that brought a sense of joy, but the act of speak- ing reflected you were grappling with your fear and had some level of trust in me, the process and your classmates. It showed me that you and many of your peers were mak- ing this space yours.

Samantha: Yes, that took time. I remember that we began each class by checking in about how we were doing and then you would ask: “I have questions for discussion, but I would like for you all to talk about what you found interesting, important and problematic in the readings.” If the class remained silent you would ask: “Does anyone want to begin?” If silence remained, you would posit questions

Dalmage and Martinez 5

to prompt discussion. By the middle of the semester the prompting was less necessary because we were more comfortable with each other and the process. And we became more aware of how our social locations informed how we were thinking about social problems. The discussions were exciting for me because I was learning, sharing, and cre- ating knowledge with my peers. I knew I had to be prepared to engage in the dialogue, so I read before class and began writing notes in my book margins. I remember read- ing Shor and Freire (1987) for class and finally felt like I had the words to articulate my experiences. I felt validated and better able to understand the purpose of knowing my social location in the context of talking about theory. I could finally see the possibil- ity for transformation.

Heather: As a professor, it is interesting to see what happens when students take control of the dialogue and their own education. While that is happening, I am also transforming and learning anew each semester to trust the pro- cess through which we are creating knowl- edge. Because, as you said, it takes time, I am nervous because we have just sixteen weeks and lots of content. I am managing my wish to move quickly through the material and my understanding that liberatory pedagogy some- times requires a leap of faith. I also remind myself that silence is not a natural state; as Freire argued, “Dialogue belongs to the nature of human beings, as beings of communica- tion” (Shor and Freire 1987:3). Additionally, I have learned that some students are more will- ing to engage in dialogue (at varied levels) as long as I am able to provide a rubric for written work—the path toward a good grade. How much I wish we could abolish grades, even as I realize we would not have our classroom space if not for the grade—the axis upon which power, credentials, and legitimacy of the status quo rests (see Freire 1998, Sixth Letter)! This is just one of the many contradic- tions that we must manage as we create libera- tory spaces.

Samantha: Although our liberatory dialogues took place within a college classroom, we were transforming the space and ourselves, but, I agree—students need to have a clear path to achieve success (that’s why we are in college!). They want liberation, they need to survive. Rubrics give me the path to fulfill

the expectations for making it within the tra- ditional system. And, the dialogic process felt liberating, but I felt overwhelmed in many of my other classes because the bank- ing system of education was still being used (Freire 1970). I had changed, the institution and pathways to success—of course—had not and it was frustrating! Now in these classes, I felt I had to silence my newly found voice in order to get a good grade! Moreover, it became clear to me that liberatory peda- gogy practiced in higher education class- rooms will not ignite social transformation—or even change higher edu- cation—I had to involve myself in actions and movements in my community.

Heather: Yes! The struggle toward liberation within dominant institutions forces us to manage being conscious of the alienation produced in the system, even as we partici- pate in that system. We have to manage our anger at the injustice, the ongoing oppres- sive educational system, while trying to achieve our credentials. I understand as a professor, I have “made it”—I have achieved success and a level of stability. I am deeply aware that many of our students are working to pull themselves and their families into more stable positions. I have a responsibility to make sure that students have cultural cap- ital and the tools they need to move toward their dreams, even as we must critically ana- lyze the role of cultural capital in reproduc- ing inequality (Bourdieu 1984; Isserles and Dalmage 2000).

EnD OF SEMESTER: CULTURAL CAPITAL AS RULES AnD RESISTAnCE Freire has noted that “dialogue is a moment where humans meet to reflect on their reality as they make and remake it” (Shor and Freire 1987:98). In the process of “remaking” students face moments of questioning their previous assumptions, goals, and relationships. They still have the real need to “make it” in a late capital world structured around auster- ity, insecurity, and a lack of public social welfare. As liberating educators, we are obligated to help students manage the contradictions inherent in challenging the world while they try to “make it.”

Heather: Near the end of the semester more stu- dents come to my office. Some students are

6 Sociology of Race and Ethnicity 00(0)

interested in their grades, many more want to talk about the excitement they feel for having a critical and sociological lens and then talk with me about the sense of crisis they feel as a result. Their new ways of understanding themselves in the world, they think, will not be accepted by their family and communities. They fear losing and dis- appointing their friends and family and fear being isolated. We talk about the complexi- ties of maintaining close bonds across all kinds of differences and building new com- munities. Some students feel stuck, they have developed a sociological imagination (Mills 1959), dream of liberation and expe- rience depression as a result! They feel trapped in their former dreams of success that are at odds with their new understand- ings of and desire for liberation. Not all stu- dents have the time, energy, or courage to come to my office alone—I bring this dia- logue back to the classroom. We talk about what it means to be “successful” and how to manage myriad contradictions of making it in an unjust world.

Samantha: In class, I was reminded that I am not alone in this fight and not the only one experiencing feelings of anguish and hopeless- ness. I learned that all of us are bound to a highly individualistic and capitalist society that benefits from our pessimism, immobil- ity, and alienation. I also learned that we are social beings seeking connection, support, and hope! I used our liberatory space in the classroom to question and move away from the American Dream built on an ideal of suc- cess that revolved around capital, competi- tion, and individualism. A number of my peers and I were connected by both the sac- rifices our families had made for us, and the demands our families had that were grounded in our being successful in higher education. As a result, we talked about our need to pursue success within a system while critically challenging and transform- ing it. For me, understanding the context and having the tools to think critically about the world gave me a sense of possibility, of hope. Realizing that we can have power over our lives encouraged me to help form a youth-led grassroots organization in my community, where I experience hope, a sense of connection, and personal and social transformation! Of course, my experience as

an immigrant affects how I see myself, my dreams, and aspirations. I am working toward a PhD. I want to learn and teach, and engage in struggles of transformation, but I also want to exist without fear of being deported or punished. Although there may be no one way out of this system in our lives, we still have the power and responsibility to question, to dialogue, to resist!

COnCLUSIOn Creating a liberatory space within the Introduction to Sociology course, situated in the physical class- room housed within higher education, is rife with contradictions. In this article we argue that explic- itly addressing the contradictions is part of the pro- cess of liberatory pedagogy. That is to say, through critical dialogue we can begin to name and ques- tion our own social locations and explore how our social locations shape our understanding of higher education and dreams of our future. The key to developing liberatory spaces within dominant, mainstream, and hierarchical institutions is in being explicit about power relations, social loca- tions, silence, and dreams for success. The contra- dictions of seeking liberatory spaces in the context of unjust social institutions, explicitly addressed, give students tools to manage the ongoing contra- dictions they will experience as they question their locations, community, and dreams within a neolib- eral, settler-colonial, racist, and sexist world. As students understand the role of their own social location, they are also learning to question the world. Thus, while the location of the liberatory space is a given, through critical dialogue with an explicit focus on injustice and contradictions, we are challenging existing domination. Our goal in this article is to show through dialogue how a pro- fessor and student reflect upon the goals, chal- lenges, complexities, and contradictions as we create a liberatory space within higher education.

REFEREnCES Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of

the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Darder, Antonia. 2011. A Dissident Voice: Essays on Culture, Pedagogy, and Power. New York: Peter Lang.

Freire, Paulo. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 20th Anniversary ed. New York: Continuum.

Freire, Paulo. 1992. Pedagogy of Hope: Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Bloomsbury.

Dalmage and Martinez 7

Freire, Paulo. 1998. Teachers as Cultural Workers: Letters to Those Who Dare Teach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Isserles, Robin, and Heather Dalmage. 2000. “Cultural Capital as Rules and Resistance: Bringing It Home in the Introductory Classroom.” Teaching Sociology 28(2):160-65.

Mills, C. Wright. 1959. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.

Shor, Ira, and Paulo Freire. 1987. A Pedagogy for Liberation: Dialogues on Transforming Education. New York: Bergin & Garvey.

AUTHOR BIOgRAPHIES Heather M. Dalmage, PhD, is professor of sociology and director of the Mansfield Institute for Social Justice and Transformation at Roosevelt University in Chicago. She uses critical pedagogy in all of her courses.

Samantha A. Martinez, BA, is the family and youth out- reach coordinator at the Gage Park Latinx Council in Chicago, is a former Mansfield Scholar at Roosevelt University.