Abstract
AbstractThis collaborative paper by members of the Pedagogies for Social Justice Research Group responds to the question of how curriculum and pedagogy can be with and for democracy. Our introduction takes Alice Rigney’s and Dewey’s insights on education and democracy as our point of departure for learning together. As a collective, we have gathered together multiple ways of perceiving and enacting a curriculum for democracy in a context of de-democratisation. We approach tensions, intersections, limits and possibilities of curriculum and democracy from the frames of ‘woven’ curriculum and critical Indigenous pedagogies; racially, religiously and culturally responsive pedagogies; dialogic and relational approaches; agentic, embodied, activist and rights-based pedagogies; and everyday praxis.Kalkadoon scholar Mikayla King’s opening paper on the woven curriculum provides both a point of departure and a grounding site for weaving together our collaborative insights into curriculum, democracy and pedagogies for justice. Garrett and Windle draw attention to how affective and embodied pedagogies can challenge mind/body binaries and activate rights-based modes of being and learning. Memon observes how religion shapes the lifeworlds of learners and proposes a move towards learning from religion. Wrench, Carter, Paige and O’Keeffe advocate for the embedding of eco-justice principles, sociologically informed curriculum, and culturally responsive and story-sharing pedagogies. Lovell and Schulz claim racial literacy as an essential component of a pluralistic democracy that honours First Nations’ sovereignty. Soong suggests that ‘everyday pedagogy’ might enable educators to relate with pre-service teachers as critical and empathetic humanists beyond the role of neoliberalised technicians. Colton and McDonald highlight possibilities within the curriculum for learners to act with the pluralities of the world. McDonald and Schulz argue that gender equity is a necessary foundation for a peaceful, democratic world. We conclude with Hattam’s reiteration of how schooling as a key site for social formation re-produces the nation. He urges us to defy the monologue of authoritarian governing and ‘live together through dialogue’.
Funder
University of South Australia
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference118 articles.
1. Ailwood, J. (2003). A national approach to gender equity policy in Australia: Another ending, another opening? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 7(1), 19–32.
2. Ailwood, J., & Lingard, B. (2001). The endgame for national girls’ schooling policies in Australia? Australian Journal of Education, 45(1), 9–22.
3. Apple, M. W. (2005). Education, markets, and an audit culture. Critical Quarterly, 47(1–2), 11–29.
4. Apple, M. W. (2016). Challenging the epistemological fog: The roles of the scholar/activist in education. European Educational Research Journal, 15(5), 505–515. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904116647732
5. Au, W. (2017). Neoliberalism in teacher education: The contradiction and the dilemma. Teacher Education and Practice, 30(2), 283–286.