A Pedagogy of Social Justice Education: Social identity Theory, Intersectionality, and Empowerment

^{(Hahn Tapper, 2013)}

This article uses examples from a ‘US-based intergroup educational organisation running conflict transformation programs since 2005’_{(Tapper, 2013 p.411)} to explore theoretical underpinnings and approaches to Social Justice Education.

I found it really interesting, having been exploring these theories since beginning the PG Cert (and usually considering their application through small interventions in a creative classroom setting, where the primary focus is teaching art and design), to read about a teaching programme explicitly built around these theories and issues of social justice. Embedding and enacting these ideas at every level of conception, planning and delivery and placing the transformation of individual learners at the centre seems radical in terms of intention.

Tapper outlines the five ‘educational pillars’ on which the organisation’s approach is based.

_{Figure from ‘A pedagogy of social justice education: social identity, theory and intersectionality’ (2013)}

With the first pillar being Paulo Freires teachings, each additional pillar draws from and builds upon the preceding pillars.

Freirean thinking is central. Freires model of education which is co-created through the integration of identities and experiences of all participants is present in the pedagogical approach throughout.

This core emphasis on the identities of participants is developed through the application of Social Identity Theory (SIT).

Tapper situates SIT in the context of another theory in the field of intergroup education namely, Contact Hypothesis _{(Allport, 1954)}. Contact Hypothesis emphasises the potential for interactions between certain groups to ‘deconstruct or even eliminate (…) negative stereotypes’ _{(Tapper, 2013 p.415)} between them. This approach is based around individual identities being reviled to uncover shared humanity. However, Tapper critiques it as having limited reach (or even potentially being counter productive when ‘connections’ are only made on a superficial level), as it fails to take social identities and inherent power dynamics into account. For this reason the organisation uses a SIT model from which to build a framework around group interactions.

The organisations use of SIT feels more comprehensive and more rooted in lived reality, as it takes account of the many overlapping group and personal identities individuals hold. Considering the conditions in which these collective identities become more or less important to the individual. Tapper goes on to hi-light how SIT can be misused when taken to the extremes of only recognising group OR individual identities and disregarding other elements of positionally.

However, Tapper describes the institutions’ understanding and application of intergroup encounters through the third pillar; Intersectionality.

Clearly a key focus for the institution is the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Tapper uses work around relations between these two groups to exemplify the organisations approach to Intersectionality.

While reflecting on the multiple identities of a Palestinian participant, the application of intersectionality (to develop intergroup encounters) emphasises the importance of understanding the meanings the individual ascribes to their identities. As well as the social and power structures in which they operate.

Prcatice

‘Liberating education consists of acts of cognition, not transferrals of information’ _{(Freire, 1970 p.52)}

Tapper goes on to outline the specific programs offered by the institution and hi-light case-studies which show how the underpinning theories and applied.

He talks about how Facilitators ‘guide’ (rather than teach) participants to extrapolate, from their experiences of interactions in group settings, understanding of systems related to social injustice ‘outside the room’ and the roles they play within these systems.

Facilitators reflect back to the group, what they perceive is happening within the group through the theoretical and critical lens of intersectionality.

The idea that the core of the education is formed through the interactions and the positionalities of individual participants feels like the practical embodiment of the radical nature of Freires teaching.

‘Students are approached as if each participant is a living text, so to speak.’ ^{(Tapper, 2013 p429)}

When students own identities and interpretations of how these intersect with others, form the curriculum itself, Freires idea of dismantling the banking system of education seem to be enacted.

I’m left imagining these settings, considering what it would look and feel like when these interactions are taking place. I imagen myself as both a participant and facilitator and in both roles i’m struck by a sense of parallel discovery and growth both internally and externally.

In the book Teaching to Transgress, in a chapter titled Theory as Liberatory Practice _{(hooks, 1994 p59)}, bell hooks talks about theoretical enquiry as linked with personal growth and healing. I imagine the two shifts at play here.

Surely, a truly radical education, focused on dismantling systems which uphold social injustice has to acknowledge the shift within the individual who has internalised these systems, as profound and central?

The institution acknowledges the personal impact of its programmes in its fifth pedagogical pillar; Responsibility and Empowerment.

Thinking about personal and scholarly growth in-tandem, for me, hi-lights the transformational potential of truly critical and reflective leaning. Enacting the ideas of Freire and hooks in terms of the function of education (transformation). As well as, the need for recognition of the ‘whole’ student/ teacher/ facilitator.

^{Freire, P., 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum Publishing Company.}

_{Hahn Tapper, A., 2013. A Pedagogy of Social Justice Education: Social Identity Theory, Intersectionality, and Empowerment. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 30(4), pp.411-445.}

_{HOOKS, B., 1994. TEACHING TO TRANSGRESS. New York: Routledge.}