In this paper Hahn Tapper examines a program of education using Social Justice Pedagogy. How it works and why it is important. I have only read the beginning of the paper and have learned so much already.
One of the first things that the article tackles is the lack of an agreed definition of social justice education. There are many definitions round the term, and as Hahn Tapper says, by not having an overriding definitive definition, the term can become diluted and confusing.
However, the overarching goal is to create students who are well versed in the ideals of social Justice and equality.
“It encourages students to challenge and transform unequal power relationships.” The education hub (2021)
The program aims, by following the theory of conflict resolution, to bring sides together with activities requiring collaboration, and that by getting to know each other through working together, barriers and prejudices will be removed, and students will have overcome any previous biases they held.
There are 5 Pillars to the theory of social Justice Education as shown in the diagram below:
Pillar 1: Freire, notion of social justice looks at the idea that education enables students “to achieve freedom both intellectually and physically” Freire (2006) Hahn Tapper (2013)
Another important element is that of students experience of life, their social identity, and that of the teachers too, and that the teacher is not just providing information as with the banking system, but that they, students, and teachers, engage in critical reflection, considering their own identities.
Teachers become facilitators, guiding students through their learning not leading, or trying to instill information upon them.
Pillar 2: Social Identity theory
The program follows the contact hypothesis, where intergroup anxiety and differences can be resolved. Thus, breaking down barriers between different groups. By creating opportunities for groups to cooperate and build positive working relationships, the negative preconceptions and stereotypes are dissolved, and conflict no longer exist. Breaking down the barriers, bias, and prejudice.
Although, there has been research to show that the contact Hypothesis has the potential to reconcile conflict within groups there is also research to show, that this method can also lead to deeper conflict if not managed properly, which is where the SIT, Social Identity Theory comes into play. “Intergroup encounters must be approached in and through student’s larger social identities.” Hahn Tapper (2013), pg 417.
“Social Identity underpins intergroup behaviour and sees this as qualitatively distinct from interpersonal behaviour.” Hahn Tapper (2013), pg 417.
Without the Social identity element, an activity based on Contact hypothesis cannot succeed. Hahn Tapper (2013)
There was much more to read on the remaining pillars, which I may have to come back to later.
How can I relate this to my practice?
I think that in the teaching that I will be doing moving forward, one off workshops, different groups of students, it could be difficult to build this into workshops. However, having said that, any opportunity for group work and discussion could draw on SIT.
References
Freire, P (2006) Pedagogy of the oppressed, 0th anniversary ed. New York, Continuum.
Hahn Tapper, A.J, (2013), A pedagogy of social Justice Education: Social Identity Theory, Intersectionality, and empowerment. In Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Vol 30, no.4. Available at: A Pedagogy of Social Justice Education: Social Identity Theory, Intersectionality, and Empowerment – Hahn Tapper – 2013 – Conflict Resolution Quarterly – Wiley Online Library. Accessed 6/6/2023
The Education Hub, (2021) A social justice approach to education. Available at: https://theeducationhub.org.nz/a-social-justice-approach-to-education/Acessed, 12/6/23
I haven’t yet read this paper but you have given a great overview Lorraine! I think your last point is really interesting. The nature of teaching at university means that we are often with different groups of students in one-off workshops and scenarios where you don’t have the opportunity to get to know them. I think it can be really hard to understand their social identity or to alleviate intergroup anxiety when you don’t know the history of the group. There can be so many things going on between them that it can be impossible to get a sense of how best to teach the class. I like to stick with the same group where possible instead of moving around so we can build relationships and I can facilitate better interactions over time. However, I recognise that this is not always possible, and depending on your job role it might rarely happen.
Hello Lorraine and Louise!
I also find that it can be difficult to implement this when if you don’t have the opportunity to get to know your students before then.
In Y1 get students to present their ideas for their project to each other in small groups as part of their formative feedback session, and I tend to pair group them with people they are friends with, so the presentations feel less daunting, but also considering who would benefit from hearing about whose project. I can see how bringing people from different groups together can help broaden students minds, but at the same time I feel like we need to build environments where they feel safe in sharing their work, and I find that having friends together helps ease the anxiety of presenting to a group.. I guess it’s about striking the right balance between the two..