The Arts and Social Justice

Recently, I have been rewriting a journal article that was previously rejected.  The theme of the special issue for the journal was the relationship between the arts and social justice.  In making connections between the arts and social justice, I thought it might be helpful to share my ideas here in this posting and solicit feedback via the “leave comments” capability of the blog.  My hope is to generate dialogue amongst readers, which in turn may clarify my own thinking.

Social justice is concerned with issues of equity, human rights, civil liberties, diversity, social agency and responsibility toward others.  Applying social justice to education means preparing all students for active and full participation in a democracy; creating a space where students exercise their agency to question and assert their views, where they learn to “temper any reverence for authority with a sense of critical awareness” (1, p.1).  It is based on the belief that what we do in the classroom is linked to the wider society.  In this way, education is connected to the possibility of a better world. 

Envisioning a better world is only possible through imagination. By releasing imagination, we can bring into being the “as if” worlds, the “possibilities.”   Through imagination, we can move from accepting the world as is toward imagining what could be otherwise, which may be the first step in bringing about change.  As Maxine Greene (2) and John Dewey (3) remind us, the arts are purposely made to release imagination, to heighten awareness, and envision multiple perspectives for those willing to move out toward them.   Though I agree that the real potential in the arts is to bring about visions of possibilities, which can lead to social change, I do not think it is an automatic process.   I argue that the transformative potential can only be realized when the arts are approached and taught in a critical, reflective, democratic way.

How does the theory translate into teaching practice?  What does critical, reflective, democratic teaching/learning look like in arts education?  To explore this question, I use examples from my own classes and ensembles.

When I think of democracy in education I immediately turn to John Dewey.  He defines democracy as being more than a form of government: “it is primarily a mode of associated living, of conjoint communicated experience” (4, p.93).  In this way, a democratic community is always in the making, always evolving.  Additionally, democracy and learning come together in the classroom only through participation (5).  Therefore, there must be evidence of active learning in order for a teaching practice to be considered democratic.  Only through active learning can students develop democratic habits rather than waiting passively to be told what things mean and what to do (6). My students actively participate in music classes through musicking, movement, drama, listening, evaluating, and discussing.  Through ensemble work, students engage with each other cooperatively – each independent player is responsible for her/himself and also for others in the group, which fosters a sense of social responsibility and interdependence.  In these ways, students learn to participate actively in their learning, developing artistic skills and experiencing democratic practice.

In addition to active learning, I think multiculturalism is another aspect of a critical, reflective, democratic practice in the arts.  MENC (Music Educators National Conference) emphasizes the importance of addressing diversity and multiculturalism in classrooms: “The music studied should reflect the multimusical diversity of America’s pluralistic culture” (7, p. 3).  But multiculturalism goes beyond teaching music of diverse genres, styles, and cultures.  I see multiculturalism as being more related to pedagogy than curriculum.   In other words, it’s not the content I present but how I present it – in a culturally responsive way, presenting instruction from the students’ perspective and life experiences as a basis for conceptual understanding and academic knowledge.  Shor suggests that when students’ diverse cultures are built into the subject content, “studying is no longer submitting to a dull imposition of an alien culture.  Based in the diversity of students, including gender diversity, the multicultural class challenges the subordination of some groups in school and society and orients the curriculum to equality” (8, p. 48).  Students come to school with strengths and knowledge they have gained outside school – by honoring and valuing that knowledge, we are in a better position to learn from each other in a reciprocal, mutually respected, democratic way.  I also think it is critical in studying culturally diverse musics to avoid presenting them in an oppressive way, that is, as decontextualized, as “exotic” or as “Other.”   In addition to socially and culturally contextualizing the musics studied, I encourage students to find commonalities across musical cultures instead of solely highlighting differences. “Nothing promotes border crossing or tolerance more than helping students to arrive at an implicit understanding of what they share in common with those they have been taught to perceive as different” (9, p. 186).

An equally important component of teaching the arts in a democratic way includes critical reflection.  For this I look to the discourse of the classroom.  Does it reflect a mutual respect which allows students and teacher to engage in dialogue?  Do students feel safe to question and assert their views, even when questioning authority?  I want my students to develop critical literacy; that is, I want them to look at “texts” (musics, art works, dance, poetry, prose) critically, question why things are the way they are, and how they might be different.  For instance, questioning how society privileges some musics and composers over others.  I think such critical consciousness leads to an empowering sense of agency for students, enabling them to imagine “possibilities.”

In contrast, what does it look like to approach and teach the arts in an uncritical, unreflective, undemocratic way?  I have seen that as well, most specifically with pre-service graduate students working with my students.   I have seen firsthand how directive pedagogy can effectively silence student voices in arts education.  Directive pedagogy is what Freire (10) called a “banking” pedagogy.  It is an authoritarian model of teaching whereby students’ minds are viewed as empty “accounts” into which the teacher “deposits” knowledge. In this model, knowledge is seen as a one-way transmission from teacher to students; students are told what to do and what things mean; the teacher teaches and the students are taught. This form of education stifles creativity and curiosity – two vital components in the arts. The graduate students who worked with my students one semester exhibited a directive or banking method of education. For example, in a collective story-generating session one graduate student chose which student ideas to promote and which to ignore, effectively shaping the final product into her own story.   In effect, she took ownership of the project away from the students.  Another graduate student was told to facilitate a Javanese gamelan ensemble rehearsal.  The student musicians were working together to learn the music and I instructed the graduate student to monitor their progress and facilitate when needed.  Instead, he turned the rehearsal into a teacher-directed session, telling the students what sections of the piece to play and choosing individual students to play it, one-by-one.  I could see students in the video-taped session quickly become bored and antsy, losing interest in their work.  Yet another graduate student offered her own dance movement to a traditional West African dance I had taught the dancers during a previous rehearsal.  It was not based on an authentic West African dance move – an example of teaching multicultural music in an oppressive, Eurocentric way – and it offended a few of the Liberian and Nigerian dancers in the ensemble.  In each example, the graduate students imposed their own ideas on the students.  One of the effects of the use of directive, banking pedagogy exhibited by the graduate students was a silencing of the students’ voices.  Additionally, by viewing the students as passive learners having to be told what to do and how to do it, the graduate students took responsibility for learning away from the students.  Fortunately, a later analysis of the data indicated that the students had a strong sense of their own agency as seen through small acts of resistance.   The silencing and creative stifling imposed by the graduate students was only temporary as the students subtly pushed back, resisting the graduate students’ attempts at authoritarian control.  Additionally, I suggest the students’ strong notion of agency came about from years of experiencing critical, reflective, democratic arts instruction in my classes and ensembles.

In formulating ideas for the above discussion, I initially had to reflect on the purpose for teaching the arts in schools.  A superficial answer (and one which my students readily offer when asked) is for students to gain content knowledge and skills in the various artistic disciplines.  More fundamentally important, though, I want my students to have a voice and to see themselves as social agents of change, to imagine a better world for all and to work toward it – in effect, to know what it is to be fully human.  As Freire (11) asserts, the purpose of education is the pursuit of a fuller humanity, and I believe the arts are the perfect vehicle for achieving that.

(1) Giroux, H. A. (2007).  Introduction: Democracy, education, and the politics of critical

pedagogy.  In P. McLaren & J.L. Kincheloe (Eds.), Critical pedagogy: Where are we now?  (pp. 1-5).  NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

(2) Greene, M. (2001).  Variations on a blue guitar: The Lincoln Center Institute lectures

 on aesthetic education.  NY: Teachers College Press.

(3) Dewey, J. (1934).  Art as experience.  NY: Perigee Books.

(4) Dewey, J. (1985).  Democracy and education. Carbondale: Southern Illinois

 University Press (Original work published 1916).

(5) Dewey, J. (1997).  Experience and education.  NY: Touchstone Publishing (Original

 work published 1938).

(6) Shor, I. (1992).  Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change.

  Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

(7) Music Educators National Conference (MENC). (1994)  National standards for arts

education: What every young American should know and be able to do in the arts. Reston, VA: MENC.

(8) Shor, I. (1992).  Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change.

  Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

(9) Duncan-Andrade, J. M. R. & Morrell, E. (2008).  The art of critical pedagogy:

Possibilities for moving from theory to practice in urban schools. NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

(10) Freire, P. (2002).  Pedagogy of the oppressed. NY: Continuum International

 Publishing Group, Inc. (Original work published 1970).

(11)  Ibid.