EDUC 605 Essay question

Running head: YOUR THEORETICAL POSITIONALITY 1

ACADEMIC SUMMARY 4

YOUR THEORETICAL POSITIONALITY 2

What School(s) of Thought, Philosophical Camp(s), and/or Explanatory Framework(s) Best Describe(s) Your Theoretical Positionality within the Field of Education?

Sarita Phumvichit

California State University, San Bernardino

College of Education: EDUC 605

December 3, 2014

What School(s) of Thought, Philosophical Camp(s), and/or Explanatory Framework(s) Best Describe(s) Your Theoretical Positionality within the Field of Education?

Within the field of philosophy of education, there are a great number of philosophical frameworks that explain the nature and the basis of education and schooling process. Each educational theory helps educators to have more thorough understanding about how they could fit in the field of education by using a combination of theories and practices that could bridge a gap between the abstract and the practice in educational realms. As education is a field, each of us has a certain framework that reinforces our practices. For me, a combination of four main theories of education: social transmission theories; conflict theories; interpretive theories; and social transformation theories, would be best employed to describe my perspectives towards education including my particular positionality at this moment of my academic trajectory.

To begin with, based on social transmission theories, schools function as breeders who reproduce values that serve the intellectual, political, economic, and social purposes of the mainstream society. As a matter of fact, such notions seem to be held true in today’s rapidly changing world because one of the main purposes why children go to school is to be able to function “properly” in the society. For instance, through schooling, children are educated to become well-equipped assets of the society. Being prepared and trained to become quality workforce, children learn how to behave and be responsible for playing appropriate roles to serve the society. As DeMarrais and LeCompte (1999) mention “schooling serves to reinforce the existing social and political order” (p. 7). From social transmission theories’ viewpoints, schooling engages children in the learning process and educates them in order to meet the mainstream society’s demands so that the society would not be in chaos. Such the theory seems to be true to me particularly in today’s capitalism world where almost every person has to increase his/her skill and knowledge through schooling so that they can be qualified “commodities in the labor market” (p. 10). In other words, although it is widely held that schools serve as tools to keep wealth and power of the privilege, it is quite difficult to refuse that students still need to be a part of the system as a fine way to add values to themselves in job markets.

Secondly, as far as conflict theories are concerned, part of my theoretical positionality as an educator is substantially affected by major ideas from these theories. Conflict theorists explain how schools promote inequality through reproduction in terms of economics, culture, and state hegemonic through practices in schools and interactions in classrooms (DeMarrais and LeCompte, 1999, p. 13). That is to say, both macro-level and micro-level contexts in schools reinforce class distinction through their division of student body and their explicit and hidden curriculum. The reason why these theories play an important role in defining a part of my current positionality in the field of education is because they are useful in effecting teaching practice.

As an educator, the notions in such the theories serve as tools to make me understand more about the aims of education and the ways of classroom practice. They help me become a better educator with fewer prejudices when teaching students from a variety of backgrounds because the theories make me recognize what causes “the tensions” in class and how such tensions characterize social organization, particularly in classroom settings. As a matter of fact, it seems to me that when educators themselves are capable of making sense of the classroom practices and the curriculum they are required to teach, they will have a better understanding of how to accommodate and assist an individual student in their own classroom.

Additionally, as for the more positive aspect towards schooling, social transformation theories yield a great purpose of being a future educator, an English educator in particular. Theorists within “interpretive” paradigm view schools as “places where meaning is constructed through the social interaction of people within the setting” (DeMarrais and LeCompte, 1999, p. 13). That is to say, it is believed that individuals have “human agency” in a sense that they are able to navigate themselves through the structure in schools (Murillo, EDUC 605 in-class lecture, November 19, 2014). As English educators, there is no doubt that the majority of their learners are linguistic minority students who are regarded as subordinated groups in nowadays society. Teachers need to understand that there are various levels of power relations in classrooms. The way they treat and use power in classrooms cannot only affect students’ academic success, but also influence the well-being of learners.

It is very important to guide students how to assert their own agency by contributing to more equitable and agentive language teaching and learning practices and environments, building students’ senses of identity and self-worth while creating the effective foundation for students’ academic success, and recognizing and honoring their home languages and ways of speaking. An example of implementing such practices into real-classroom settings would be to employ curriculum that reflect the social lives of the students, embed tasks within activities which connect students to their own linguistic and cultural backgrounds, and use their identities and first languages as resources for learning and teaching others. Also, pedagogical practices must enable the conditions for minority language students to speak and to be heard. Pedagogy should incorporate broader sociocultural framing of language use which values and develops the diverse social languages present in classrooms as well. My theoretical positionality for being a future English educator is to make my students aware about the issues of power and how power is conveyed so that they can unveil the underlying meaning of these messages and react critically.

Finally, under the same umbrella of social transformation theories lies an important idea of critical theory which plays an essential part in shading the light on my philosophical positionality as an English educator. It is generally held that “schools are cites where power struggles between dominant and subordinate groups take place” (DeMarrais and LeCompte, 1999, p. 31). Up to a certain degree, this seems to be a universal truth because the issues of power influence even English as a Second Language (ESL)/English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teaching in many aspects. For example, language, materials, activities of the classroom and language politics of the school are all constrained by unequal power relations. The power in the social world also affects learners’ access to the target language community, and thus to opportunities to practice listening, speaking, reading, and writing. As an English educator, I strongly believe that one must account for relations of power in order to gain a fuller understanding of ESL/EFL teaching and learning processes.

Also, oftentimes, educators devaluate and even deny the linguistic, cultural and academic identity of linguistic minority students, especially in a traditional English teaching methodology. For instance, many classrooms have the “English-only” policy. Even some bilingual schools use monolingual instructional strategies and discourage students to use their primary language in class. However, such practices should not be considered appropriate and allowed in class. Instead, teachers should be able to promote collaborative relations of power to empower students, and they should affirm student’s sense of identity and extend their identity in interactions. Such the ways would help students in creating their “human agency” through classroom practices.

Taking everything into consideration, the obvious conclusion to be drawn is that philosophy of education proposes a variety of interesting ways for me to view schooling and to realize my role and responsibilities as an educator. My current philosophical positionality in the field of education is to make sense of the current educational situation and try my best to raise students’ awareness about schooling and education by employing philosophy of education as a tool. It seems to me that the most important aspect for my positionality is to stay positive about schooling and education as a social ladder for my students, and to be fully aware of the nature of schooling system and curriculum in order to understand and make the best use of them.

References

DeMarrais, K. B., & LeCompte, M. D. (1999). The way schools work: A sociological analysis of education. New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Murillo, E. (2014). Education 605, California State University, San Bernardino, California.