In this episode I introduce the University of Edinburgh’s Curriculum Transformation and its relation to the radical political activism of critical theories.
I wrote a paper on the topic that, after I set the scene, I am going to read in sections over the next few episodes which you can find below:
Introduction
The University of Edinburgh is currently in the process of transforming the curriculum which will institutionalise a partisan political approach to the education of young people. A university-wide approach is being taken with regards to this change, with an emphasis on student engagement as well as student and faculty co-creation of course content and assessment (Curriculum Transformation Hub, 2021). This transformation is based on the idea that the old static and knowledge-centric ways of higher education are no longer fit for the complex and crisis laden world we are confronted with, and that a new experimental approach is required that engages students, raises their awareness to the processes of teaching and learning, from which is supposed to follow enhanced teaching and learning experiences that generate ethical, global citizens (Felten, Bovill, & Cook-Sather, 2014).
I am an undergraduate student and not an educational scholar, I do not have any specialist knowledge on the topic. However, I have had interactions with students from various schools who are dissatisfied with the standard 80-100 pages of reading, two to three hours of lectures, one hour of weekly discussion, the writing of essays and the sitting of exams. I am of the opinion that rigorous, considered changes would likely be well received by students, resulting in their greater intellectual and personal development; I am not necessarily at odds with the idea of involving students in the creation of the curriculum. That being said, the devil is in the details.
In this paper my aim is to demonstrate that there are concepts and theoretical framings present in the evidence justifying the Curriculum Transformation Programme (CTP) that suggest that it is underpinned and motivated by the theoretical and practical political methodologies of Critical Theory. This presence, I will argue, is never made explicit by the authors so that prospective students and their parents are fully informed of the theoretical context that will underpin their education. Authors are referenced who deploy these concepts, though nowhere is it explicitly articulated that the future education of young people at the University of Edinburgh will be heavily influenced by the ideas of radical partisan political activist/scholars. My argument is that it is reasonable to expect this kind of transparency from a university-wide transformation of the curriculum, regardless of which radical political tradition is motivating it. I will also encourage the reader to consider the following questions: How political should education be? What influence should radical political movements have on the education of young people? To what degree are those involved in the transformation aware of the political nature of the ideology motivating this new curriculum? And, importantly, why have there not been greater efforts made to make this theoretical influence more explicit to students, parents, faculty, and the interested public?
The structure of this paper is as follows. I will open by providing a definition of critical theory and its purpose, followed by evidence of the presence of critical theories in the Curriculum Transformation Programme. I will largely draw from the Curriculum Conceptualisations and the University of Edinburgh briefing paper published by Dr Catherine Bovill, though I will also draw from other sources. These sources are available on the ‘Insights and Evidence’ section of the university website as well as on the Curriculum Transformation Hub. I will then give an account of the proposed transformation as advertised by the university, as well as the scope and imminence of the programme; I will suggest that we have far less time to respond to this issue than is desirable. I will then argue that Critical Theory has a political purpose, has theoretical and practical methods to achieve this political purpose and sees education as a tool with which to achieve this. I will further argue that the University of Edinburgh is an institution where this is being implemented. I will conclude that, due to the explicit partisan political nature of much of the undergirding ideology behind the proposed curriculum reform, the Curriculum Transformation Programme ought to be disbanded and an independent inquiry be undertaken into how we have arrived at this place, just moments before the political ideological capture of one of our country's ancient universities. I will also encourage facilitation of a conversation or debate as to how political or neutral our research and educational practices ought to be. I will suggest that the answer be: ‘as politically neutral as possible’, instead of ‘expressly political, so long as it is the ‘right’ politics’.
To briefly summarise my argument: You have to think about the world as critical theorists are describing it to you. By definition, this is how critical theorists would conduct themselves toward education, those among them who take it seriously. If they believe that the current social reality is a result of the interaction between societal structures and ideologies justifying the elevation of the haves at the expense of the have nots; and if the most influential structure that produces this reality is education; and if their theoretical framework is simultaneously descriptive, normative, and practical in attempts to bridge the gap between regularity and normativity – making how things are into how they ought to be; then it follows that, in order to bring their normative vision of the social world into alignment with how things are, the field of education needs to play a significant role in the achievement of this aim. It makes sense that they have done and continue to attempt what Isaac Gottesman details in his 2016 book The Critical Turn in Education: From Marxist Critique to Poststructuralist Feminism to Critical Theories of Race:
As participants in the radical politics of the sixties entered graduate school and moved into faculty positions and started publishing, the critical turn began to change scholarship throughout the humanities and social sciences. The field of Education was no exception… The critical turn radicalized the field… The critical turn has contributed greatly to educational scholarship. This is something to celebrate. (Gottesman, 2016 p.1,2 - authors emphasis)
Critical Theory
Critical theories as they exist today are movements of social critique and political activism derived from the Neo-Marxist and the Postmodern traditions along with other radical social theories (Giroux, 2004 p.32, Gottesman, 2016 p.1). There is a narrow (capitalised) and a broad (not capitalised) meaning to ‘Critical Theory’. The narrow meaning refers to the Institute of Social Research commonly known as the Frankfurt School, a collection of Neo-Marxist scholars who came together in the early 20th century to critique Marx and understand why Western societies were not moving away from Liberal Capitalism to Socialism on the way to the idealised classless stateless society of fully realised Communism. A critical theory is distinguished from traditional theory by Max Horkheimer in his 1972 essay Traditional and Critical Theory in that it seeks to bring about a world that is ultimately liberatory for all human beings. As such, it is concerned not primarily with understanding the world – as traditional theory is – but instead with changing the current world; to bring into being one where all people are free from all oppression by critiquing and transforming oppressive and dominating elements of society. Following this distinction, “[b]ecause such theories aim to explain and transform all the circumstances that enslave human beings, many ‘critical theories’ in the broader sense have been developed… any philosophical approach with similar practical aims could be called a ‘critical theory’” (Stanford Encyclopaedia, 2005 – emphasis in original). These include but are not limited to Critical Race Theory, Queer Theory, some Postcolonial Studies, Whiteness Studies and Critical Pedagogy. I think it is also crucial to notice that critical Theories are concerned with “all circumstance[s] that enslave human beings” and as such could be deployed wherever there are boundaries, whether arbitrary or organic, that could be interpreted as oppressive and enslaving – an all-too-common feature of contemporary conversations on issues of social justice – and therefore has the potential to be a totalising theory and practice.
A critical theory - in either the narrow or broad sense – must simultaneously fulfil three criteria: 1) It must be explanatory; it must provide a description of society; 2) It must be normative; it must have an idealised vision of how society ought to be and following from criterion 1) it must critique the current society for failing to live up to that ideal; and 3) It must be practical. Following from 1) and 2), it must advocate for and engage in political activism to bring about the idealised vision of society (Stanford Encyclopaedia, 2005, Lindsay, 2022 p.94). As such, critical theories have two abstract elements (explanatory and normative) and one concrete element (practice) and it is therefore reasonable to see them as a political movement of activist scholars, as do Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic in their 2001 book Critical Race Theory: an introduction.
The purpose of a critical theory, following Marx, is to ruthlessly critique all that can be interpreted as oppressive (Lindsay, 2022 p.103) and to transform the oppressive and domineering elements of society into liberatory elements. As the current society is believed to exist at the command of the dominant classes and is therefore corrupt (Lindsay, 2022 p.94), all aspects of society – persons, processes, or ideological and material structures – are seen as either perpetuating the dominant society or as possible sites for the liberation of the oppressed classes (Freire, 1985 p123).
Liberation is to be achieved through the raising of collective revolutionary consciousness (Srinivasan, 2020 p.412). This is the awareness that the dominant social order exists as a consequence of the interaction of political, economic, and legal structures with ideologies that “support and entrench patriarchy, white supremacy, and capitalism…” which then determine outcomes that favour the dominant group (Gottesman, 2016 p.3, Ladson-Billings in Gottesman, 2016 p.128). In short, the dominant social order is equated with racism, sexism, homophobia, and so on. Critical consciousness is also the awareness of one’s role in either reproducing the oppressive society or resisting it (Freire, 1985 p123). The aim is that once collective consciousness has been achieved, nobody will think or act in oppressive ways that result in exclusion or oppression, and all will be right with the world. Only through advocating for and achieving collective critical consciousness will the aims of critical theories, a democratic-socialist, feminist, and anti-racist society be possible (Gottesman, 2016 p.3). Recall that racism and sexism are equated with the dominant social order, and not as single or multiple instances of racism and sexism; as such anti-racist and feminist efforts within critical theories, concerned with eliminating racism and sexism, are opposed to and seek the elimination of the dominant social order (Ladson-Billings in Gottesman, 2016 p.128). Without successfully raising collective critical consciousness some people will always feel excluded, tyrannised, and otherwise oppressed, as those who have not achieved it will think and act with priorities other than those based on socialist, feminist, and anti-racist beliefs, demonstrating that the ideal society, and as such justice, has not been realised.
Critical theory is a radical revolutionary social and political movement/theory (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001 p.2) that advocates for a particular view of the social world to be adopted by all in society. This worldview generates a duty of conscience to act in accordance with its values and perspectives. Its ultimate purpose is to cease the reproduction of Western Liberal civilisation, characterised as essentially oppressive and tyrannical. Following this its aim is to produce and sustain a vaguely defined idealised social order. This will be a society liberated from oppression as a concept having seized the means of material, cultural, and epistemic production that produced and perpetuated oppression in the first instance. Hence the presence of critical theories in the field of education where this purpose is most likely to be achieved, as it bleeds into all aspects of life. It is believed that if critical education theorists have control or significant influence over education, then they have control or significant influence over the future of our society; as such it is a totalising revolutionary political activist movement.
Share this post