Page 396 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

31 On Critical Thinking, Indigenous Knowledge and Raisins Floating in Soda Water 371

write “home and abroad” because, as Kincheloe notes, a reciprocity (i.e., learning
from each other) is needed to achieve Kincheloe’s goal, no matter where one
resides in the world. After all, if a primary school classroom in Canada or the
United States carries out a natural science project about the Rainforest in South
America (a common enough endeavor), can the learning truly be as complete as
possible without, for example, mentioning the relationships, which deprived South
American’s of their forests? A significant issue is that because of consumerism
in North America, the rainforests have become depleted. Moreover, can a classroom in
Brazil truly understand the state and health of their rainforests without investigating
their relationship with what (and why) they produce for export and evaluate the
equity or sustainability of that trade relationship with North America? In trying to
tackle some of these questions, another essential element of critical pedagogy
arises, that is, education, which uncovers what is so often hidden within the curricu-
lum and simply taken as “business as usual” in schools and affects people so deeply
(Apple 2004).
Schools do not only control people; they also help control meaning. Since they preserve
and distribute what is perceived to be “legitimate knowledge” – the knowledge that “we all
must have,” schools confer cultural legitimacy on the knowledge of specific groups. (Apple
2004, p. 61)
From a critical pedagogy perspective, education is often analyzed in terms of
how it serves the needs of colonialism and imperialism in all contexts, to develop
a teaching and learning environment for schools in which potential injustices can
be revealed and acted upon in schooling. To accomplish this goal, critical peda-
gogues call for the professionalism of teachers, which in turn, necessitates a new
type of “accountability” that requires that educators become scholars and researchers
(Shor and Pari 1999). The kind of accountability that is linked with critical peda-
gogy is unlike the standardized “top down” version that has been co-opted and
twisted by those in power today to serve government needs. It is a form of account-
ability that empowers teachers to stand behind their teaching choices and to speak
out against what is often mandated, enforced, and normalized from the top down.
Two great rivers of reform are flowing in opposite directions across the immense land-
scapes of American education. One river flows from the top down and the other from the
bottom up. (Shor 1999, p. vii)
Whereas Shor characterizes the top-down river as being an authority stemming
from “… conservative agendas that support inequality”, the bottom-up waters of
knowledge derive from “…multicultural voices speaking for social justice” (1999).
Shor and Pari’s book, Education is Politics (1999), reports concrete examples of teachers
who have moved from what Kincheloe (2003) refers to as the traditional “technicist”
approach to education where teachers are highly controlled by those above them, to an
approach where accountability is conceptually recaptured as a responsibility for teachers
to embrace as Education itself. Education is a true profession when this sort of critical
pedagogy is realized, which goes beyond a set of standards imposed from above.
Education from above tends to claim neutrality and meritocracy while reinforcing
inequality for all. In contrast, the bottom-up approach encourages teachers to be active,