Running head: PERSONAL

Personal Theory of Curriculum: The Use of Freires Liberation/Critical Pedagogy and

Deweys Democratic Education Practices to Foster Social Activism and Student
Engagement in a Learner-Centered, Social Reconstruction Curriculum

Harley Walden

Research Paper submitted for

CI 702 Curriculum Theories
at Marshall University
in partial fulfillment for the requirements
for the degree of

Doctor of Education in Curriculum and Instruction

Elizabeth Campbell, Ph. D., Instructor

Graduate School of Education and Professional Development

South Charleston, West Virginia

2014

PERSONAL

Personal Theory of Curriculum: The Use of Freires Liberation/Critical Pedagogy and

Deweys Democratic Education Practices to Foster Social Activism and Student
Engagement in a Learner-Centered Social Reconstruction Curriculum
According to Schiros (2013) classifications of the four main curricular
ideologies, my ideal personal theory of curriculum would be an amalgamation of all with
particular emphasis on the learner-centered and social reconstruction ideologies. The
issue of outdated and boring textbooks in public school curricula has plagued educators
for decades. All educational content areas (disciplines) have certain limitations in terms
of content standards with scope and sequence in addition to material that must be covered
in order to address prompts on high-stakes tests. If students experience a poor quality
curriculum with little context due to requirements associated with high-stakes tests, then
they will also be unable to draw from that knowledge base and develop critical thinking
skills that are essential for success in college and adult life outside of school (Ravitch,
2013).
Some approaches to teaching have too often relied heavily on worksheets and
textbook rote memorization of facts, theories, formulas, dates, and key names. For
example, in Social Studies this traditional instructional approach can deny students the
possibility of engaging with primary source documents consisting of first-hand narratives
of individuals from the historical period that is covered. It also fails to engage students by
not having them analyze their own role in social activism and changing their community
for the better, which is now becoming an integral component of a public school
curriculum. Every day public school teachers face the challenge of making instruction
come alive for students and have them consider their place in the future, but a revised
curriculum consisting of Freires liberation/critical pedagogy and Deweys use of

PERSONAL

democracy in learning could ease that task and lead to a more engaging classroom
experience. Since high-stakes testing relies on textbook content, the public school
curriculum has greatly been influenced by what is covered on those assessments.
However, the adoption of textbooks in the review process is one of the most important
forms of curriculum work and offers educators a unique challenge in terms of content
material (Hewitt, 2006). Textbooks have often been utilized as the cornerstone for content
material in the classroom for decades, as they served as primers for the high-stakes tests
that would come at the end of every school year (Ravitch, 2013).
Interestingly Common Core was designed as a means to decrease the reliance on
textbooks and shift the learning paradigm to an increase in the use of primary sources,
however, there is a strong disconnect in the way that Common Core was envisioned and
the way in which it has been implemented in school districts across the country (Cairn,
2012). This disconnect between the way that Common Core was designed and the ways
that it is being implemented across the country could be further complicated by the issues
associated with high-stakes testing in the modern classroom and is reflective of another
disconnect between the ways that politicians and policymakers use the word evaluation
(Hewitt, 2006).
Evaluation as a term has been misused and misconstrued in place of assessment
and accountability in terms of grades. Assessment is a term typically used in regard to
student learning, specifically with tests and other forms of measuring student academic
performance, whereas evaluation is viewed as an analysis of the data yielded from
assessments and described as a value or appraisal of the curriculum for a particular school
system (Hewitt, 2006). These terms, although used interchangeably in the incorrect

PERSONAL

context, hold significant power and influence when wielded by those in roles of political
authority.
The use and advancement of high-stakes tests are driving the issue of public
school curriculum stagnation. These political machinations unfortunately fail to address
the real roots of educational inequalities in the public school system, mainly the
discrepancies in achievement between different cultural and socioeconomic groups,
which could be alleviated by implementing policies aimed at improving health care and
pre-school opportunities for lower SES families (Ravitch, 2013). Efforts similar to those
suggested by Ravitch (2013), reflect a growing sociopolitical challenge facing the
modern public school curriculum in regard to the growing rates of diverse students from
foreign countries in the modern classroom and the biases that high-stakes tests pose for
them (Banks, 2012). This is caused by the fact that most standardized tests are created
from an Anglo-European perspective and fail to account for the diversity among student
populations in the 21st century.
As a result of the narrowing of the curriculum, there has been a sharp increase in
the incidents of cheating by educators and administrators aimed at improving their
schools Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) score (Berliner, 2011). The increase in the
number of these incidents is due to the focus of high-stakes testing and the drastic
narrowing of the curriculum aimed at avoiding terminations and the loss of state funds
allocated to schools that meet their designated Adequate Yearly Progress score that was
established by the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act and continued with President Obamas
Race to the Top initiative (Berliner, 2011). Also high-stakes testing has shown to be an
unreliable predictor of student achievement and learning in the classroom, especially in

PERSONAL

cases of students coming from low socioeconomic backgrounds, as they require

additional academic supports that are lacking in their lives outside of the classroom
(Baker & Johnston, 2010). This is in contrast to the rhetoric espoused by some politicians
and policymakers regarding the challenging economic times of post-modern America.
In order to effectively address the issues of student disengagement with the
curriculum and the problems associated with high-stakes testing, I would implement a
new curriculum consisting of Paulo Freires liberation pedagogy and John Deweys
emphasis of democratic learning. The incorporation of Paulo Freires liberation/critical
pedagogy is vital for my suggested changes to the public school curriculum because it
emphasizes the contributions from specific groups of people who are marginalized by the
mainstream historical narrative contained in most textbooks and provides students from
diverse cultures with more meaningful examples about the contributions made to the
world by others from foreign countries (Banks, 2012). The integration of Freires
liberation/critical pedagogy translates well to all content areas, as Science can be just as
disengaging in terms of curriculum as Social Studies has been. Also the contributions
from minority scientists are often overlooked in favor of more traditional scientific
contributions from the dominant culture that have been discussed in textbooks over the
years since Sputnik.
In fact, Freires liberation/critical pedagogy initially was created because of his
experiences with the poor and illiterate citizens of Brazil during the juntas military rule
in the 1960s (Freire, 1970). However, his pedagogy, which dealt with the oppressed
peoples of Brazil became one of the most influential works on curriculum around the
world and inspired numerous educators to alter their instructional methods in order to

PERSONAL

incorporate the narratives and contributions from minority authors and politically
oppressed groups throughout history. The emphasis on the narratives and contributions of
minorities was not the only important element of Freires liberation/critical pedagogy that
I would incorporate into my proposed curriculum, as he also advocated for social
activism in the community (Freire, 1970). In contrast to the passive apathy, which Freire
argues is a result of the banking approach to learning, social activism in the community
fosters a sense of empathy in students, as they encounter individuals from disadvantaged
backgrounds struggling to survive in modern America. This is in keeping with Freires
idea that human existence cannot be silent, nor can it be nourished by false words, but
only by true words, with which humans transform the world (Freire, 1970, p. 88).
Students would learn, through their volunteer work, that every culture has its own
perspective on events and must be considered when looking at global issues.
The second theoretical component of my suggested changes to the existing public
school curriculum is the incorporation of John Deweys belief in educational democracy
between students and teachers. Deweys educational Progressive nature meant that
students were viewed as equals to teachers in the learning process, which echoes similar
opinions voiced by Freire. Deweys opinions on equal opportunities for students shaped
his specific viewpoints on educational policy, as he thought that any viewpoint that
looked on education as a measurable endgame missed the mark, as growth was its own
end (Urban & Wagoner Jr., 2009, p. 253).
Another important component of Deweys belief in the democratization of
education was that schools should act as the genesis of democratic thought and that all
were equal in terms of learning and instruction. This holistic approach to learning is lost

PERSONAL

in the high-stakes testing era in the modern classroom, as grades receive paramount
interest from policymakers and politicians. Dewey crafted his particular curriculum
around the central idea that students and teachers would work in a close proximity to one
another and utilize the ability to freely express controversial ideas in a dialectic nature
(Urban & Wagoner Jr., 2009). This approach to instruction coalesces with Freires
emphasis on the praxis of learning where the oppressed would achieve liberation with
their oppressors in an act of intellectual love (Freire, 1970).
As Pinar (2011) illustrates, the modern public school system has all too often
become an incubator for the cram school mentality where educators are not much more
than hired actors that teach to the test in order to avoid being penalized or fired for
literally not making the grade. It is for all of these reasons that I would implement a new
curriculum into the public school system that consists of social justice issues, community
activism, and a sense of democratic learning in the classroom. The specific changes that I
would have to implement in order to alter the issue of public school curricular change
would include elements from Freire and Dewey.
Instead of relying heavily on a textbook, I would utilize primary source
documents found on online archives as my content material. These archives contain
narratives from minority authors and offer an alternative perspective to the one that most
students would be familiar with. They are typically free of charge, although some do take
donations. Dean Cantu (2003) studied how the use of digital collections and primary
source documents can be taught to pre-service Social Studies teachers in an attempt to
improve their proficiency and familiarity with the digitized archives. Cantu (2003) sought
to change the ways that Social Studies students perceive the discipline, from a noun

PERSONAL

(notes, books, tests) to a verb (sculpting, acting, dissecting, playing) (p. 291). This is an
interesting concept, as most students constantly question the validity of certain content
areas, such as Social Studies and Science, as required classes.
Students would be exposed to individuals, such as Cesar Chavez and George
Washington Carver, and other minority leaders who are an integral component of
American history and the public school curricula. This removes the token use of minority
groups that currently exists in the curriculum. This is important, as the diversity among
student populations increases and linguistic barriers are present in the modern classroom
(Banks, 2012). Also students would be involved in a large amount of journaling in order
to reflect on their interactions with others from unfamiliar ideological backgrounds.
Finally, students would be required to be involved with volunteer work in the community
aimed at either improving their school or helping the poor through various avenues. This
departure would give students hands-on experience with people who are different than
them and instill a sense of social justice within the public school curriculum.
Now with a basic understanding of what theoretical framework my ideal, personal
theory of curriculum would operate from, I will describe the pragmatic implications for
what it would actually look like in action, as there are sometimes nuances and differences
between a theory on the books and its implementation on the ground. In essence, my
personal theory of curriculum is a reaction against what Freire called the banking
approach to learning, as it is described as an act of depositing, in which the students are
the depositories and the teacher is the depositor (Freire, 1970, p. 72). This is the type of
learning environment that Common Core was designed to combat by lessening the
teachers and students reliance on outdated textbooks by incorporating engaging primary

PERSONAL

source documents (Cairn, 2012). However, as it became implemented into public school
districts across the country, politicians and policymakers altered it in many ways, so that
it no longer maintains its original intent in most cases.
The ultimate goals for my personal theory of curriculum is to create scenarios and
possibilities for students to dialectally discuss their points of view, identify important
social issues that contain elements of injustices, and then take actions to combat those
social inequities, instead of merely using rote memorization tactics to prepare for an
upcoming exam. This would also simultaneously infuse the curriculum with strong
underpinnings dealing with the contributions and writings from minority authors in order
to avoid token uses at designated times throughout the school year. As my personal
theory of curriculum may have many hallmarks of an altered Social Studies curriculum, it
could just as easily be implemented into any content area/discipline.
The first component of the Freire/Dewey curriculum consists of engaging students
in an open discussion concerning central themes and key words that are essential to the
curriculum, such as oppression, injustice, and socioeconomic status. This discussion is
important for the success of the curriculum throughout the rest of the school year, as it
allows the educator the opportunity to measure what students already know about social
justice issues and the complicated factors associated with inequalities. Students would
then begin entries into their reflective journals that would become a daily practice at the
end of their instructional periods. This would allow them to think back on their day
dealing with social injustices and hopefully get them started on an individualized theme
that is of paramount importance to them. Once identified, this central theme would serve
as their social justice project for the rest of the school year.

PERSONAL

10

This curriculum would be a school-wide initiative across content areas, so the

learning experience would become more meaningful for students, as they would
experience these issues in all of their classes. For example, if a student chose the politics
associated with illegal immigration, then they could learn about the contributions from
minority scientists from that specific part of the world and about the specific legislation
that is being implemented in the American Southwest, which only hinders students from
diverse cultures in their transition to the American public school system (Banks, 2012). In
their English class they would study the literary contributions from authors from that
country.
The spatial layout of the classroom would be constructed in circle in order to
create a communal sense of collaborative learning. At the conclusion of every week every
class would reconvene in order to have a reflective dialogue regarding different points of
view about their individual social justice theme for their class project, which was an
essential component of Deweys belief in the democratization of education. As the
capstone of the project, a social activism component would also be required from both
the students and the teachers as well. This act of volunteer work would have to be a
school-sanctioned function aimed at either improving their school or their community
through work with the poor or other disadvantaged groups.
Finally, the assessment component of the curriculum would be constructed with
Ron Bergers (2003) idea of student-created rubrics in mind. As students progressed in
their classes, they would discuss the idea of what a mastery level of academic
achievement would look like and determine the guidelines for each individual grade letter
in regard to essays, written prompts, and completion of their individualized social justice

PERSONAL

11

year-long projects. This curriculum would not only better prepare students better for
success in college than high-stakes testing does, but also allow them to develop critical
thinking skills and basic understandings of social justice issues that are reoccurring as
current events in life outside of the classroom. Bergers (2003) concept of a studentestablished rubric or grading scales echoes Frenchs (2003) alternatives to high-stakes
assessments, such as portfolio defenses, gallery walks, and performances, which all allow
for student preference and personal interests and serve as more equitable means of
assessment in light of the problems associated with high-stakes testing and what Pinar
(2011) calls the cram school mentality of instruction.

PERSONAL

12
References

Baker, M., & Johnston, P. (2010). The impact of socioeconomic status on high stakes
testing reexamined. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 37(3), 193-199.
Berliner, D. (2011). Rational responses to high stakes testing: The case of curriculum
narrowing and the harm that follows. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(3),
287-302. doi:10.1080/0305764X.2011.607151
Banks, J. A. (2012). Multicultural Education. In J. A. Banks & C. A. McGee Banks (
Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (8th ed.). Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley and Sons
Berger, R. (2003). An ethic of excellence: Building a culture of craftsmanship with
students. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cairn, R. (2012). Primary sources: At the heart of the Common Core standards. The
Teaching with Primary Sources Journal, 1(2).
Cantu, D. (2003). Using web-based resources to confront pre-service social studies
teachers' disinclination to primary source document integration. International
Social Studies Forum, 3(1), 291-296.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Bloomsbury.
French, D. (2003, September). A new vision of authentic assessment to overcome the
flaws in high stakes testing. Middle School Journal, 35(1).

PERSONAL

13

Hewitt, T. W. (2006). Understanding and shaping curriculum: What we teach and why.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Pinar, W. F. (2011). What is curriculum theory? London: Routledge.
Ravitch, D. (2013). The reign of error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the
danger to America's public schools. New York: Knopf.
Schiro, M. S. (2012). Curriculum theory: Conflicting visions and enduring concerns (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Urban, J.U. & Wagoner, Jr., J.L. (2009). American education: A history (4th Edition).
New York, NY: Routledge.