The Possibilities of Transformation: Critical Research and Peter McLaren

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to unveil how Peter McLaren’s revolutionary brand of pedagogy, multiculturalism, and research colored my two-year qualitative research study, which unearthed twenty White female future teachers’ experiences and perceptions in relationship to computing technology and male-centered computing culture. His ideas positioned me to see beyond technocentric discourses generated by political, economic, and education leaders, as I was enabled to pinpoint how larger social relations of power perpetuate computing technology as a “boy’s toy,” designed to amass wealth and power for elite White male corporate leaders at the expense of the vast majority of global citizens. His scholarship also proved to be a source courage and inspiration. It prodded me to believe my research project has the potency to bludgeon unjust practices that perpetuate women's and girls' technological reticence, fuel the corporate takeover of teacher education, and perpetuate Western imperialism, environmental degradation, and hopelessness across the globe. Not coincidently, the critical study served as an educative space for several pre-service teachers. They uncovered how several constitutive forces merge with unjust practices to create women’s and girls’ computing reticence as well as perpetuate women’s marginalization in schools, the business world, and in other social contexts. They appear to possess the critical mindset and courage to create classroom practices bent on forging an egalitarian society

References

1. Agosto, D. (2004). Girls and gaming: A summary of the research with implications for practice. Teacher
2. Librarian 31(3), Retrieved February 23, 2004 from, http://www.teacherlibrarian.com/tlmag/v_31/v_31_3_feature.html
3. Akubue, A. I. (2001). Gender disparity in Third World technological, social, and economic development.
4. The Journal of Technology Studies, 27(2), Retrieved June 22, 2004 from, http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTS/Summer-Fall-2001/akubue.html
5. American Association of University Women Educational Foundation and American Association of University Women (April 2000). Tech-savvy: Educating girls in the new computer age (Parts 1- ). Retrieved April 2, 2002, from Contemporary Women’s Issues database.
6. American Association of University Women (1998). Gender gaps: Where schools still fail our children. New York: Avalon Publishing Group.
7. Aguirre, L. C. (2001). The role of critical pedagogy in the globalization era and the aftermath of
8. September 11, 2001. Interview with Peter McLaren. Revista Electrónica de Investigación

9. Educativa, 3(2). Retrieved January 22, 2004, from http://redie.ens.uabc.mx/vol3no2/contenido- coral.html
10. Apple M.W. & Jungck, S. (1998). “You don’t have to be a teacher to teach this unit”: Teaching technology and control in the classroom. In H. Bromley & M. Apple’s (Eds.),
11. Education/technology/power: Educational computing as social practice (pp. 133-154). Albany: SUNY Press. Bromley, H. (1995). Engendering technology: The social practice of educational computing.
12. Unpublished Doctorial Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Bromley, H. (1998). Introduction: data-driven democracy? social assessment of educational computing. In H. Bromley & M. Apple’s (Eds.) Education/technology/power: Educational computing as a social practice (pp. 1-25). Albany: SUNY Press.
13. Bromley, H. (2001). The Influence of context: Gender, power, and the use of computers in schools. In R.
14. Muffoletto’s (Ed.), Educational and technology: Critical and reflective practices. New York: Hampton Press. Bryson, M. & de Castell, S. (1998). New technologies and the cultural ecology of primary schooling:
15. Imagining teachers as luddities in/deed. Educational Policy 12(5), 542-68. Cassell, J., & Jenkins, H. (1998). Chess for girls? Feminism and computer games. In J. Cassell & H.
16. Jenkins (Eds.), From Barbie to mortal kombat: Gender and computer games (pp. 2-45). Cambridge, MA: MIT. Clegg, S. (2001). Theorising the machine: Gender, education, and computing. Gender and Education (3), 307-24.
17. Clerc, S. (1996). Estrogen brigades and “big tits’ treads: Media fandom online and off. In L. Cherny & R.
18. Weise’s (Eds.), Wired_women: Gender and new realities in cyberspace (pp. 73-97). Seattle: Seal Press. Cooper, J. & Weaver, D.K. (2003). Gender and computers: Understanding the digital divide. New York:
19. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold & Underused: Computers in the Classroom.Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
20. Douglas, C., Dragiewicz, M., Manzano, A., & McMullin, V. (2002). United States: In video games,
21. Black women are victims, Latinas don’t exist. Off Our Backs, 43(3/4), 6. Eubanks, V. (2000). Paradigms and perversions: A women’s place in cyberspace. The CPSR Newsletter
22. (1). Retrieved October 24, 2003 from, http://www.cpsr.org/publications/newsletters/issues/2000/Winter2000/eubanks.html
23. Gorski, P. & Clark, C. (2002). Multicultural education and the digital divide: Focus on gender. Multicultural Perspectives, 4(1), 30-41
24. Henwood, F., Wyatt, S., Miller, N. & Senker, P. (2000). Critical perspectives on technologies, in/equalities and the information society. In S. Wyatt, F. Henwood, N. Miller, & P. Senker
25. (Eds.), Technology and in/equality: Questioning the information society (pp. 1-18). New York: Routledge. Hill, D. (2004). Critical education for economic and social justice: A Marxist analysis and manifesto. In
26. M. Pruyn & L. M. Huerta-Charles’ Teaching Peter McLaren: Paths of Dissent (pp. 146-185). New York: Peter Lang. Hinchey, P. & Cadiero-Kaplan, K. (2005). The Future of Teacher Education and Teaching:
27. Another Piece of the Privatization Puzzle. The Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 3 (2). Retrieved, September 27, 2005, from http://www.jceps.com/?pageID=article&articleID=48
28. Houston, B. (1996). Role models: Help or hindrances in the pursuit of autonomy? In A. Diller, B.
29. Houston, & K. P. Morgan (Eds.), The gender question in education: Theory, pedagogy, & politics, (pp. 144-160). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. Huber B.R. & Schofield J.W. (1998). “I like computers, but many girls don’t’: Gender and the sociocultural context of computing. In H. Bromley & M. Apple (Eds.),
30. Education/technology/power: Educational computing as a social practice (pp. 103-32). Albany: SUNY Press. Huntemann, N. (Director and Producer). (2000). Game over: Gender, race, and violence in video games videorecording]. Northampton, MA: Media Education Foundation.
31. Jenson, J. (1999). Girls ex machina: A school-based study of gender, culture and technology.
32. Unpublished doctorial dissertation. Simon Fraser University. Jenson, J., de Castell, S. & Bryson, M. (2003). ‘’Girl talk’’: Gender, equity, and identity discourses in a school-based computer culture. Women’s Studies International Forum, 26(6), 561-573
33. Jenson, J. & Brushwood Rose, R. (2003). Women@ work: Listening to gendered relations of power in teachers’ talk about new technologies. Gender and Education 15(2), 169-181.
34. Kellman, L. (2000, June 20). Bush promoting $400 million education plan. Retrieved June 20, 2000 from, http://www.aol.com.
35. Kincheloe, J. L., & McLaren, P. (2000). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In N. K.
36. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research: Second Edition (pp. 279- ). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Kincheloe, J. (2006). Life in…. In Peter McLaren’s Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education (Xi-Xvi). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
37. Lissovoy, N. & McLaren, P. (2003). Educational ‘accountability’ and the violence of capital. Journal of
38. Educational Policy, 18(20), 131-144. Littleton, K. & Hoyles, C. (2002). The gendering of information technology. In N. Yelland & A. Rubin
39. (Eds.), Ghosts in a machine: Women’s voices in research with technology (pp. 3-32). New York: Peter Lang Publishing. Luther, D. (1997). First Nations preservice women teachers' experiences and perceptions regarding technology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.University of Saskatchewan.
40. Maher, F. (2002). The attack on teacher education and teachers. Radical Teacher, 64 5-8.
41. Margerum-Leys, J. & Marx, R.J. (1999). Teacher education students’ beliefs about technology. Washington D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED429589)
42. Margolis, J. & Fisher, A. (2003). Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. Cambridge,
43. Massachusetts: The MIT Press. Millar, S.M. (1998). Cracking the gender code: Who rules the wired world. Toronto: Second Story Press.
44. McLaren, P. (1995). White terror and oppositional agency: Towards a critical multiculturalism. In P.
45. McLaren, R. Hammer, D. Sholle, & S. Reilly’s (Eds.). (1995), Rethinking media literacy: A critical pedagogy of representation (pp. 87-124). New York: Peter Lang.
46. McLaren, P. & Torres, R. (1999). Racism and multicultural education: Rethinking race and Whiteness. In S. May’s (Eds.) Critical Multiculturalism: Rethinking multiculturalism and antiracist education (pp. 42-76). New York: Falmer Press.
47. McLaren, P. (2000). Che Guevara, Paulo Freire, and the pedagogy of revolution.Lanham, MD:
48. Rowman & Littlefield. McLaren, P. & Farahmandpur, R. (2003). The globalization of capitalism and the new imperialism:
49. Notes towards a revolutionary critical pedagogy. In G. Dimitriadis & D. Carlson (Eds.), Promises to keep: Cultural studies, democratic education and public life (pp. 39-76). New York: Routledge. McLaren, P. (2003). (4th Ed.) Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
50. Mclaren, P. (2005). Capitalists & conquerors: A critical pedagogy against empire. New York: Roman and Littlefield Publishers.
51. McLaren, P., Martin, G., Farahmandpur, R., Jaramillo, N. (2004). Teaching in and against empire:
52. Critical pedagogy as revolutionary practice. Teacher Education Quarterly, 31(1), 131-153. McLaren, P. (2006). (5th Ed.) Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
53. Pehar, J. (2003). E-Brides: The mail-order bride industry and the Internet. Canadian Women Studies, (3/4), 171-157.
54. Porfilio, B. & Hall, J. (2005). “Power city” politics and the building of a corporate school. Journal for
55. Critical Education Policy Studies 3(1). Retrieved, June 22, 2005 from http://www.jceps.com/index.php?pageID=article&articleID=38.
56. Rajagopal, I. & Bojin, N. (2004). Globalization of prurience: The Internet and degradation of women and children. First Monday, 9(1). Retrieved February 16, 2005 from, http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_1/rajagopal/index.html
57. Rizvi, M. (2002). A radical educator’s view on the media. Interview with Peter McLaren. Znet. Retrieved, April 22, 2003.
58. Saltman, J.K. (2004). Coca-cola’s global lessons: From education for corporate globalization to education for global justice. Teacher Education Quarterly 31(1), 155-72.
59. Sarikakis, K. (2004). Ideology and policy: notes on the shaping of the Internet. First Monday, 9(8), retrieved January 23, 2005 from, URL: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_8/sarikakis/index.html
60. Scott-Dixon, K. (2004). Doing it: Women working in information technology. Toronto: Sumach Press.
61. Slagle, M. (2005 March 11). PSP serves up games, audio & video. Retrieved March 12, 2005 from, http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=570484
62. Sofia Z. (1998). The mythic machine: Gendered irrationalities and computer culture. In H. Bromley &
63. M. Apple (Eds.), Education/technology/power: Educational computing as a social practice (pp. 52). Albany: SUNY Press. Stepulevage, L. (2001). Gender/technology relations: Complicating the gender binary. Gender and Education 13(3), 325-338.
64. Thomas, G. & Wyatt, S. (2000). Access is not the only problem: Using and controlling the Internet. In S.
65. Wyatt, F. Henwood, N. Miller, & P. Senker (Eds.), Technology and in/equality: Questioning the information society (pp. 21-46). New York: Routledge. Weiler, K. & Maher, F. (2002). Teacher education and social justice. Radical Teacher, 64, 2-4.
66. Weinstein, M. (1998). Computer advertising and the construction of gender. In H. Bromley & M. Apple
67. (Eds.), Education/technology/power: Educational computing as a social practice (pp. 85-102). Albany: SUNY Press. Weinstein, M. (1998). Computer advertising and the construction of gender. In H. Bromley & M. Apple
68. (Eds.), Education/technology/power: Educational computing as a social practice (pp. 85-102). Albany: SUNY Press. Wenninger, M. D. (1998). Achieving gender equity in classroom computer usage. Women in Higher Education, 7(11), 35-36. Notes
69. The study was launched, in the spring of 2003, at a small, independent coeducational institution of higher learning, which comprises 2,600 students, nine hundred of whom are housed within the Graduate Department of Education. “Border College” (pseudonym) is located proximate to the Canadian/U.S. border, somewhere in the Northeastern part of the United States.