17325509 Rebecca Wilman

Assessment 2: Essay
Tools for Change: Knowledge, Power and Critical Thinking

It is essential teachers operate surrounded by depths of knowledge about culture, and have
a practice of critical analysis (Connell, 2009, p. 224). Teachers must therefore become
aware of their interpretation of the world and discover thinking outside the dominate narrative
through a social, cultural, economic and political lenses (Gobby & Karnovsky, 2017, p. 78).
Since teaching and learning is inextricably linked to these aspects of our shared culture,
‘best practice’ comes into question when critical analysis of educational theories and a depth
of knowledge about culture is lacking social justice perspectives and a critically reflective
practice (Down, 2017, p. 127). This leads already disadvantaged students to increasingly
become disengaged and perpetuates a cycle of deficit thinking that requires a critique of
schooling (Down, 2017, pp. 122- 126). Instead, as intellectual workers, teachers engage
critically in thinking and with deeper understandings about poverty, class, gender, sexuality,
Indigenous education and cultural diversity; challenging the social norms (Gowlett &
Niesche, 2017, p. 359).

As intellectual workers, teachers have a profound responsibility to think outside the dominate
narrative and question if or how their perspective impacts on the students of today. As
agents for teaching and learning, an awareness of different beliefs and perspectives enables
teachers to interpret the world through various and differing social, cultural, economic and
political lenses (Gobby & Karnovsky, 2017, p. 78). For instance, in the 1950’s, the dominate
narrative towards left-handedness was perceived to be a form of brain disorder or syndrome
that was at the time perceived in the scientific community as a defective quality (Gobby &
Karnovsky, 2017, pp. 65-66). Therefore, in schools, students were discouraged from using
their left hand when writing and were often punished by teachers for the ‘habit’ (Gobby &
Karnovsky, 2017, pp. 65-66). While the assumptions against left-handedness was later
found to be false, the underlying cultural bias that created this false perception was believed
without question. Thousands of students were marginalised in society through cultural
prejudice which with hindsight resonated back then, the need for teachers to become
intellectual workers, who understood the power of culture, knowledge and truths and the
affect their beliefs have on students’ mental health and well-being (Gobby & Karnovsky,
2017, pp. 66-6). Teachers, who reflect awareness of their preconceived ideas or
interpretations of the world are better able to negate cultural biases and instead work

1
17325509 Rebecca Wilman

towards changing the cycle of dominate thinking in their classrooms. Therefore, teachers
who apply cultural lenses to professional practice transform culture as they transfer it to the
next generation, becoming agents for change (Connell, 2009, p. 224).

Similarly, this is also evident in teachers to who recognise the need for critical pedagogy. In
an era dominated by neoliberal and neoconservative ideologies, teachers should now more
than ever see themselves as intellectual workers (Smyth, Down & McInerney, 2014, p. 94).
The previous Abbott government’s education reforms centre on a return to ‘practical
teaching methods based on didactic teaching methods’, in an attempt to improve education
for all (Smyth, Down & McInerney, 2014, p. 94). To an intellectual worker, this statement is
not convincing, as taking a ‘back to basics’ approach such as America and the United
Kingdom, has shown no proof that it effectively increases student knowledge, and in fact
shows signs that prove increased disadvantages (Dinham, 2014, p. 6). When considering
who influences pedagogy, (politicians) teachers who question political decisions need to
understand the political motives that trickle down and influence classrooms (Smyth, Down &
McInerney, 2014, p. 93). When considering the political right’s opinions towards education
reform, matters of social justice are very low and often avoid the distribution of funds to
schools most in need (Smyth, Down & McInerney, 2014, p. 93). When understanding that
education serves to either enable or inhibit questioning habits, these facts from an
intellectual workers perspective, could indicate the former attempt (Smyth, Down &
McInerney, 2014, pp. 93-94). In doing so, a return to ‘basics’ could disable student’s critical
relation to understanding knowledge, power and society; leaving naivety to succeed (Smyth,
Down & McInerney, 2014, p. 93). Teachers who interrupt this agenda are what Ings calls a
‘productively disobedient teacher’; challenging the industrial model though showing higher
levels of competence and leadership (2017). However it is these teachers who ensure
intellectual quality, connectedness, supportive classroom environments and recognition of
difference; ensuring critical engagement (figure 1) and reflection is an integral part in the
process to becoming an intellectual worker, who critically utilises reflective practices to guide
meaningful instruction (Down, 2017, pp. 126-127).

2
17325509 Rebecca Wilman

Figure 1: Layers of Critical Engagement (Patterson, 2013, p.11)

In the same way intellectual workers challenge the dominant political narrative, they should
also understand how the education system has changed and critically think about how it
affects society. Through the power of critiquing schooling, utilising a reflective practice
becomes integral in preventing disadvantaged students from becoming increasingly
disengaged, perpetuating a cycle of deficit thinking (Gobby & Millei, 2017, p. 55; Down,
2017, pp. 122- 126). Therefore a teacher who understands where the education system has
developed from and can map these changes in how society has ‘grown up’, possesses a
‘depth of knowledge’ about the culture, and is better able to critically analyse social
constructs or norms (Millei & Bendix Petersen, 2017, p. 237). Evidence of this statement is
notably found when observing the changes education has endured from a traditional
institution that regulates itself and envelops norms and practices that have strong prejudiced
historical forces and agendas influencing from far beyond the context of education (Gobby &
Millei, 2017, p. 55). For instance, when growing up in the 1940’s, predominately white
students sat quietly and took in information, classrooms were harsh on discipline and
damaging to self-confidence, while Aboriginal students were stolen to be raised in catholic
institutions without their families (Australian Broadcast Corporation, 2010). 60 years later,
educators now know the important differences in childhood experiences, including in
between cultures but also within ‘modern’ societies (Connell, 2013, p. 24). Today, Aboriginal
students are still struggling to regain their culture and with additional migration, especially
from diverse backgrounds leads a new generation of digital natives, in a world with instant

3
17325509 Rebecca Wilman

information and high expectations (Australian Broadcast Corporation, 2010). What 21st
century generations have experienced, another calls an abomination. Therefore as
intellectual workers, teachers’ awareness of these changing social norms and values enable
them to reflect on classroom approaches such as ‘one size fits all’ and its appropriateness in
a diverse classroom (Connell, 2013, p. 24). Instead, acknowledging students arrive with
specific social experiences and learning, shaped by diverse families (Connell, 2013, p. 24).
Essentially, the classroom is no longer a closed world; it is important for teachers to embrace
this network of connections in conjunction with students’ virtual school bags (Connell, 2013,
p. 24).

On the other hand, when educators do indeed see themselves as intellectual workers, this is
beneficial to all students no matter their social, cultural and economic status. Through being
aware of the diverse contexts students come from in addition to their ‘virtual school bags’,
enables teachers to better comprehend the relationship between social class, schooling and
economic inequalities (McGregor & Mills, 2017, p. 373). This is important due to the largely
marginalised and disadvantaged groups of students showing disengagement and
consequentially, less success at school (McGregor & Mills, 2017, p. 386). According to
Sriprakash and Proctor, the national discourse that we live in is driven by social stratification
through meritocratic ideals that marks issues of class irrelevant or hidden by the belief that
‘merit’ rather than by ‘birth’ or ‘class’ ensures social advancement (2013, p. 80). Therefore,
socio-economic and cultural status can either increase or decrease socio-economic
advancement; with the latter causing increased disengagement in a system that perpetuates
dominate thinking and social norms, marginalising the disadvantaged inequitably (Sriprakash
& Proctor, 2013, p. 80). With this knowledge, an intellectual worker is able to critically
analyse why this occurs (social discourse) and look within personal teaching and learning
practices to identify and change the factors increasing this divide in education. Evidence of
this is observed when teachers critically analyse school policies, personal teaching and
learning pedagogies and curriculum issues (McGregor & Mills, 2017, p. 376). Often the
triggers surrounding school practices do not align with student’s complex lives and home
responsibilities and link homework not being completed every night with punishment
(McGregor & Mills, 2017, p. 376). Then, students sit down and attempt to engage in a
curriculum that is disconnected from the problems in their lives and finally, presented
through a pedagogical approach that is authoritarian and teacher-centred (McGregor & Mills,
2017, p. 376).

4
17325509 Rebecca Wilman

By examining student’s cultural capital in relation to school policies, personal teaching and
learning pedagogies and curriculum issues, disengagement can be decreased through
understanding and making changes towards a diverse set of learners needs. Intellectual
workers show this by being aware of student lives and pressures so not to overwhelm
students with homework (McGregor & Mills, 2017, p. 376). They are innately aware of
student backgrounds and socio-economic status in order to present real-world and relevant
topics into curriculum planning and finally, learn to change approaches to match learning
styles and best practice approaches for diverse learners; such as student centred, problem-
based and critical pedagogy (McGregor & Mills, 2017, p. 376). One school of thought says
“schools alone cannot make up for the injustices that some people face”, however is that
statement true? (McGregor & Mills, 2017, p. 377). If teachers see themselves as intellectual
workers then their personal circumstances, deficit thinking, social norms and dominant
thinking are challenged by critical analysis, changing into a deeper understanding about
poverty, class, gender, sexuality, Indigenous education and cultural diversity; causing
teachers to break the cycle of social justice issues (Gowlett & Niesche, 2017, p. 359).

As intellectual workers are innately aware of contextual factors leading to social justice
issues, so too are they aware of gender and sexuality binary thinking, dominating the status
quo (Pearce, 2017, p. 195). Binary thinking encompasses the way society understands the
different concepts between ‘hot’ and ‘cold’, ‘on’ and ‘off’ and often is translated into the social
construct of ‘male’ and ‘female’ (Pearce, 2017, p. 196). Therefore, it is understandable that
language encourages us to think in a two sided dichotomy, linked to our cultural context
(Pearce, 2017, p. 196). However, within our language and culture, false dichotomies have
developed from an oversimplified belief that males and females are clearly distinct, including
the way each behaves and differences in interests (Pearce, 2017, p. 196). Unfortunately, this
dominant binary viewpoint in society provides no ‘safe’ platform to doubt the status quo, in a
supposedly tolerant Australian society (Pearce, 2017, p. 196; Taylor, 2007, p. 210). An
example of this thinking is evident in the way adults, not small children, design, construct,
advertise and buy toys that reflect normalised gender traits (Brannock, 1999, p. 32). When
Barbie dolls are exclusively only for girls and action men for boys, messages about gender
norms are established (Brannock, 1999, p. 32). However, due to this being false dichotomy,
the boundaries surrounding typical behaviour and interests are not indefinite or unchanging
and create a broken social script that appears to make sense and fixed; however easily
interchangeable (Pearce, 2017, p. 197). For instance, when a boy’s behaviour and interests
relate to dancing and singing, identified as a female the trait of sensitivity, that boy is seen to
be feminine instead of what is sociably acceptable; masculine (Brannock, 1999, p. 33).

5
17325509 Rebecca Wilman

Within this perception, society punishes boys who do not conform to this dominant model
through marginalisation, and harassment, both verbally and physically (Brannock, 1999, p.
34). Evidence of homophobia undoubtedly exists in Mack’s account of what he does to
socially fit in and oppress his dancing nature, by revealing “…to not be too into dancing at
school because I might lose some friends.” (eOne ANZ Videos, 2016). This example reveals
the influence male and female binary thinking has had on a society as a whole, and what
deficit thinking students believe about themselves being wrong, different; conforming to a
social script to fit in (Pearce, 2017, p. 197). As teachers who care about the mental health
and well-being of students and make an effort to create safe and open learning
environments, it is challenging to think that even teachers are reflecting this false dichotomy
in classrooms (Pearce, 2017, pp. 197-199). Therefore as an intellectual worker, teachers
who understand this dynamic of binary thinking are able to critically reflect on school policy,
classroom language, books used, lesson values and overall messages that teachers send
students about being male and female and challenges them in current and future education
reforms (Pearce, 2017, pp. 197-199).

Just as intellectual workers critically reflect on false dichotomies, they should also know and
reflect about issues surrounding diversity and difference. Indigenous education and cultural
diversity is not a newly marginalised topic in education; often through racism (Keddie, 2017,
p. 267). This stems from a colonial period where education was used as a tool for exclusion
and a perpetuated by a xenophobic fear of difference (Keddie, 2017, p. 267; Rudolph &
Brown, 2017, p. 315). In an effort to dissuade these prejudices, the concept of liberal
multiculturalism rose through ‘cultural pluralism’ that focuses on lowering racism by teaching
a tolerance of cultural differences that builds understanding and appreciation of all cultures
(Keddie, 2017, p. 277). However, intellectual workers with deep knowledge about the topic
will understand that this type of tokenistic culturalism lacked depth and was superficial with
what Keddie calls ‘sprinkling’ throughout the curriculum and lead to ‘othering’ of non-
dominant cultures; another binary understanding, ‘us’ and ‘them’ (Keddie, 2017, p. 277).
Instead, intellectual workers think critically about past policies and build upon pluralism with
critical multiculturalism as a more effective celebration of diversity, showing the relationship
of social power and creating experiences within cultural groups; linked through shared
experiences (Keddie, 2017, p. 276). Therefore, Raewyn Connell’s assertion that that
educators need to see themselves as intellectual workers, requiring them to possess a
‘depth of knowledge about the culture, and a practice of critical analysis’ is indeed true if the

6
17325509 Rebecca Wilman

21st century teacher, wishes to enact real growth and positive change in a society for all
(Connell, 2009, p. 224.)

It is more than ever essential that teachers operate surrounded by depths of knowledge
about culture, and have a practice of critical analysis (Connell, 2009, p. 224). Teachers
therefore must become self-aware and discover thinking outside the dominate narratives
through a social, cultural, economic and political lenses (Gobby & Karnovsky, 2017, p. 78).
Since teaching and learning is indeed inextricably linked to these aspects of our shared
culture, ‘best practice’ is informed by a critical analysis of educational theories in relation to
depth of knowledge about culture to reveal social justice issues and a need for critically
reflective practice (Down, 2017, p. 127). Without, this leads already disadvantaged students
into becoming disengaged and perpetuates a cycle of deficit thinking caused by never
questioning the status quo in school policies (Down, 2017, pp. 122- 126). Instead, as
intellectual workers, teachers who actively think critically and with deeper understandings,
challenge incorrect social norms about poverty, class, gender, sexuality, Indigenous
education and cultural diversity, for the better of all students (Gowlett & Niesche, 2017, p.
359). Therefore, knowledge and critical analysis are truly powerful tools for change.

7
17325509 Rebecca Wilman

References

Australian Broadcast Corporation. (2010).The Making of Modern Australia: The Australian

Child - Ep 1 of 4. [Video file]. Retrieved from https://edutv-informit-com-
au.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/watch-screen.php?videoID=53555

Brannock, J. (1999). Rapunzel barbie or action man? Learning the lessons of gender. In
D. Meadmore, B. Burnett, and P. O’Brien (Eds.), Understanding education: contexts
and agendas for the new millennium (pp. 32-40). Sydney: Prentice Hall.

Connell, R. (2009). Good teachers on dangerous ground: towards a new view of teacher
quality and professionalism. Critical Studies in Education, vol. 50 no. 3, 213-229.
Retrieved from https://www-tandfonline-
com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/17508480902998421

Connell, R. (2013). Growing up. In R. Connell, A. Welch, M. Vickers, & D. Foley (Eds.),
Education, change and society (pp. 16-31). South Melbourne: Oxford University
Press. Retrieved from
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/detail.action?docID=1986002

Dinham, S. (2014). The worst of both worlds: How the US and UK are influencing education
in Australia. 2014 Walter Neal Oration. Australian College of Educators. Perth.
Retrieved from https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1865/1615

Down, B. (2017). Critically reflective practice: What is it and why is it needed now? In B.
Gobby & R. Walker. (eds). Powers of curriculum: Sociological perspectives on
education (pp. 118-141). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

eOne ANZ Videos. (2016). Open Sky. Retrieved from

https://www.facebook.com/eOneANZ/videos/10156807401155430/

Gobby, B. & Karnovsky, S. (2017). Questioning how and what we know: new concepts to
approach education. In B. Gobby & R. Walker. (eds). Powers of curriculum:
Sociological perspectives on education (pp. 60-85). South Melbourne: Oxford
University Press.

Gobby, B. & Millei, Z. (2017). Schooling, its history and power. In B. Gobby & Walker, R.
(eds). Powers of curriculum: Sociological perspectives for education (pp. 36-
59). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

8
17325509 Rebecca Wilman

Gowlett, C. & Niesche, R. (2017). Learner diversity and school practices. In B. Gobby & R.
Walker. (eds). Powers of Curriculum: Sociological perspectives on education. (pp.
353-372): South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Ings, W. (2017). Welby Ings: the productively disobedient teacher. [Video file]. Retrieved
from https://youtu.be/mnyUepeNBYA

Keddie, A. (2017). Rethinking Australia's cultural diversity. In B. Gobby & R. Walker

(eds). Powers of curriculum: Sociological perspectives on education. (pp. 267-287).
South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

McGregor, G. & Mills, M. (2017). The virtual schoolbag and pedagogies of engagement. In
B. Gobby & R. Walker. (eds). Powers of curriculum: Sociological perspectives on
education (pp. 372-392). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Patterson, S. (2013). Layers of Critical Engagement: Exploring the Intersections of

Leadership, Critical Theory, and Learning. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary-wiley-
com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/doi/epdf/10.1002/abc.21106

Pearce, J. (2017). The trap of binary thinking: Problematising gender and social
disadvantage. In B. Gobby & R. Walker. (eds). Powers of Curriculum: Sociological
perspectives on education. (pp. 194-214): South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Rudolph, S. & Brown, L. (2017). Understanding the techniques of colonialism: Indigenous

educational justice. In B. Gobby & R. Walker (eds). Powers of curriculum:
Sociological perspectives on education. (pp. 288-320). South Melbourne: Oxford
University Press.

Smyth, J., Down, B., & McInerney, P. (2014). Socially critical pedagogy of teaching. In J.
Smyth, D. Down, & P. McInerney. (Eds). The Socially Just School. (pp. 93-110).
Netherlands: Springer. Retrieved from https://link-springer-
com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/book/10.1007%2F978-94-017-9060-4

Sriprakash, A, & Proctor, H. (2013). Understanding the relationship between schooling and
social class. In R. Connell, A. Welch, M. Vickers, & D. Foley (Eds.), Education,
change and society (pp. 79-98). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Taylor, A. (2007). Innocent children, dangerous families and homophobic panic. In S.

Poynting (Ed.), Outrageous!: moral panics in Australia (pp. 210-222). Hobart,
Tasmania: ACYS Publishing.