SUMMARY

Ryan, A., & Walsh, T. (2018). Reflexivity and Critical Pedagogy. Leiden, The
Netherlands: Brill. Read chapters 1 and 2.

The chapters provide an interesting discussion on the recognition of inequalities in access to

education and how certain knowledge is sustained through a lack of critique. The authors
emphasize reflexivity as the primary driver of critical pedagogy, as it enables a critical
assessment of the multiple layers in the construction of power. They argue that without
reflexivity, education becomes merely a process of transferring knowledge. Education, as
secondary socialization, plays a crucial role in building individuals' capacity to interpret the
world through dominant or critical lenses. This acknowledgment is vital in understanding how
education must be liberating rather than perpetuating dominant narratives. The importance of
situating knowledge even among educators, who come from diverse backgrounds and share
different life experiences and positions, is highlighted. Drawing on Foucault's ideas, they
stress the importance of being consciously aware of the hierarchy of assumptions that
structure societal norms and expectations, and how these affect lived experiences at both
individual and group levels.Moreover, the authors discuss the potency of discourses present in
all areas of human life. Additionally, they present an interesting cycle of pedagogical
development grounded in self-understanding (how personal events shape values),
understanding the system (missed the approaching on acknowledging how yourself benefits
from the dominant system), and understanding the learner (transgressing assumptions of
educator power and unique knowledge, recognizing educators as learners as well).

Question: How to apply critical pedagogy in textbooks of countries that colonized and were
colonized in order to promote reflexivity and challenge dominant Eurocentric narratives?

Keywords: Reflexivity; Discourse; Pedagogical development; Power.

SUMMARY
Walsh, C.E. (2023), On Justice, Pedagogy, and Decolonial(Izing) Praxis. Educational
Theory, 73: 511-529.

The authors argue that social justice alone is insufficient for decolonizing pedagogy. The text
offers intriguing reflections on social justice rooted in Paulo Freire’s pedagogy, whom I
greatly admire for his statement: “when the education is not liberating, the dream of the
oppressed is to become the oppressor.” It is fascinating to observe, through Freire's lens, with
whom the authors collaborated, how Freire, despite his contributions, is also the subject of
criticism by indigenous scholars, particularly regarding his situated position in terms of
gender, race, and Western society. One term that I encountered for the first time was "praxis,"
which I understood as practical actions aimed at sociopolitical transformation. Furthermore, it
appeared from the text that the entire process of decolonizing pedagogy primarily involves
awareness, learning, and re-learning, without assuming any single or definitive form of
knowledge. An example of this approach can be found in García’s work on “in-house”
projects, which empower black communities through a sense of belonging, memory,
resistance, and affirmation. Lastly, the authors employ the metaphor of a crack in the wall to
illustrate their advocacy for praxis in pedagogy, suggesting that through incremental change,
the dominant system can eventually be dismantled. Despite the hopeful optimism, I appreciate
the acknowledgment in the conclusions that we must not underestimate the system's ability to
rebuild or reinvent itself, as noted by Marx.

Question: The authors advocate that justice itself is not enough, delving into critical
pedagogy coupled with praxis. However, it is still unclear to me the idea of the insufficiency
of justice; who determines that? Who determines what justice is in the first place? Without
critical pedagogy and praxis, would social justice be defined by a Western, white, and
Eurocentric frame?

Keywords: Praxis; Justice; Pedagogy; Re-