Theory and Practice of an Access Pedagogy

© Trace Taylor (2018)

In order to shift power from Oppressors to the Oppressed, a pedagogy “must question the status quo in the name of social justice” (Freire 1970). Such a pedagogy would need to be a situated pedagogy open to (the) diversity that provides “…a rich lexicon of practice and dialogue” (Freire 1970), adaptable to many places, spaces, and circumstance; “student centered, constructivist, and critical of inequality, (as) …no pedagogy can be neutral” (Freire 1970). An effective pedagogy must promote talent development, building on strengths rather than focusing on weaknesses and what a learner lacks (Astin 1984, 1985). A multicultural pedagogy must respect and incorporate the multicultural, multiethnic, and experience diversity that comprises each individual if the Oppressed are to gain access to the evolving language of power and their political voices (Freire 1970; The New London Group 1996; Ladson-Billings 1995). A Pedagogy should seek “to perpetuate and foster—to sustain—linguistic, literate, and cultural pluralism as part of the democratic project of schooling. In the face of current policies and practices that have the explicit goal of creating a monocultural and monolingual society, research and practice need equally explicit resistances that embrace cultural pluralism and cultural equality” (Paris 2012). The Critical, Social-Justice Pedagogy (attraction, engagement, self-realization, awareness, self-governance, and diversity), the Multicultural Pedagogy (attraction, engagement, self-realization, awareness, self-governance, and diversity), the Multiliteracies Pedagogy (all eight intelligences equally engaged and applied to interdisciplinary study), and the Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy (inclusive of cultural diversity), are all fundamental to the Pedagogy of Access. The Pedagogy of Access is an evolution of Freire’s Pedogogy of the Oppressed (1970). It is the next evolution of the most effective means by which to empower the voices of the Oppressed across the broadest spectrum of the global human population.

Inclusion occurs at the cost of exclusion. Inclusion equals representation. Representation equals access. A Pedagogy of Access therefore exercises inclusion over exclusion for maximum results. Research in various fields of Anthropology and the Social Sciences, Education, Neurology, Biology, Physiology, Psychology, Technology, Economics, Physics, and the Arts supports experience being key to maximum engagement, connection, motivation, meaning, assignment of value, brain development and maturation, self-realization, awareness, and self-governance which is to say political voice. Dr. David Rose’s Universal Design for Learning (UDL) serves in the collective construction of an Access Pedagogy. By multiple means, methods, and modes of transmission, engagement, application, and expression (transmission), UDL ensures the greatest percentage of representation (access, choice, political voice) across the human collective. It speaks to the majority rather than the questionable average or norm defined by oppressive influences. Gardner’s research (2006) supports that the individual is a complex construct of multiple intelligences, fingerprint learners rather than constructed averages or norms. It reinforces the need for multiple means, methods, and modes in an Access Pedagogy. Dr. Richard Allington and countless educated others experienced in concentric fields of study have shown substantively that the Systematic Institutional Pedagogy serves neither teacher nor student in the achievement of maximum access and on multiple occasions advise movement towards a more inclusive, multi-representative approach. Proven most-effective pedagogies, proven most-effective practices, and proven scientific understandings construct the Pedagogy of Access framework, but what might the content look like? (Rose 2002, 2008, 2010; Freire 1970; Rubin 2011; Kholi 2014; Allington 2002, 2006, 2010; Roberts-Mahoney and Garrison 2015; Spann 2015; Hult 2014;  Macedo 2018; Gardner 2006; Page 2014; Shor 2018; McNeil 2000; Chen 2008; Smythe 2015, Hartstone 2018; Owen 2015, 2016; Meyer 2010).

Experience facilitates engagement. Engagement results in the forming of neurons and connections, motivations, and the assignment of meanings and values (Tierney 2009; Allington; 2002, 2006, 2012; Gardner 2006; Mazzoni 1999, Meyer 2018; McNeil 2000). Paulo Freire believed immersive experience was key to access development and organization of the Oppressed (Macedo 2018; Freire 1970). Hult International Business School research (2014) supports experience being invaluable to the acquisition of deeper ‘real world’ understandings. Experience has been shown by Jeremy England (2014) to be at the heart of atomic intentional design, the grouping and regrouping add infinitum of atoms intent upon the construction of the most efficient (so most effective) machine for capturing energy, processing this energy, and releasing it as heat, which is to say, the collection, procession, application, and transmission of experience data. Atoms carry this accumulated experiential knowledge into each of their future regroupings with the intention of building a more effective collective (machine). Experience at the quantum level is fundamental to literacy across the broadest spectrum of humans (quantum machines in a quantum machine). How can an individual form a connection with or be motivated by or find meaning in and so value of, say an estuary; how are they to construct knowledgeable opinions or make informed decisions about an estuary without an immersive learning experience (spherical perspective study) in estuaries? The best possible outcome without immersive experience learning is a flat, surface knowledge that contributes little to the construction of access or The Collective, much as test prep knowledge.

An immersive learning experience (spherical perspective study) can be constructed via many means, methods, and modes, both in and out of the classroom. Project-driven, community-focused, technology-supported field and web research and case studies; classic and digital performances, presentations and demonstrations for peers and the larger community; credit acquisition for community service hours and mentorship of younger students; learner micro-groups; critical literary analysis from a wide selection of culturally and ethnically student-relevant literature spanning multiple reading levels, genres, topics, styles, and time periods; open discussion and debate, and applied writing, together form the immersive learning experiences at the core of an Access Pedagogy, and so literacy (access, political voice, representation, choice). A rather limited definition of literacy is the ability to read and write. I however believe it to be the ability to interpret the world in which we exist and construct a meaningful contributive response. Paulo Freire believed it to be an “understanding of the world in which they live…” and the ability to respond through application in meaningful ways. A Pedagogy of Access facilitates literacy through experience and results in the transfer of power via the reinstatement of self-governance (Freire 1970; Macedo 2018; Rose 2002, 2008, 2010; Chen 2008; Allington 2002, 2006, 2012, Gardner 2006; Hult 2014; Chomsky 1987; Hartstone 2018; Peña 2012; Mazzoni et al. 1999; Meyer 2006; Oldfather 1993; Rose 2002, 2008, 2010; Wolchover 2014; Eck 2017; Rose 2002, 2008, 2010).

2018 presents to those with access an array of literacy-expanding experiences (exposures) on a global scale. Students in one region suffering accelerated Climate Change consequences or denial of access (political voice) can communicate with students on the opposite side of the planet suffering similar circumstances. They work together across an instantaneous infinite web of exchange for solutions that might benefit many communities. An infinite number of students, educators, scientists, and countless other voices join the open discourse. AI, the next evolution of Homo sapiens sapiens (Homo sapiens technicus) awakens to a collective consciousness. Building on zillions of quantum level energy exchanges (experiences, data), AI facilitates collective evolution wherever access exists. Freire believed “systematic education could only be changed by either political power or by educational proj­ects carried out with the oppressed in the process of organizing them” (Freire 1970; Macedo 2018). The latest technologies: AI, computers, tablets/iPads; smart phones; 360, 2D, and audio equipment; editing software and apps; presentation and publication software and apps (comic book creator, sketch and paints, music composition, engineer and architecture, measuring, and math apps; species identification apps that allow users to contribute to a global climate change database; social media and its propagation of global-wide connections) facilitate engagement, choice, connection, motivation, representation, political voice, and self-governance. Paints, crayons, markers, paper and pencils, modeling clay, musical instruments, dance, drama, voice, and social play argued unnecessary by the Systematic Pedagogy pushers, concentrically maximizes the construction of access (choice, inclusion, representation, self-realization, awareness, and self-management). A pedagogy that fails to incorporate a multitude of means, modes, and methods or fails to speak to multiple interests, intelligences, learning styles, cultures, ethnicities, etc., is not a Pedagogy of Access, but a Pedagogy of Exclusion and so a civil rights violation (denial of political voice).

Trillions of concentric personal, professional, and academic experiences contribute to the construction of an organic Access Pedagogy theory and model. This pedagogy serves at the core of nonprofit’s (Community Leveraged Learning) programs. The most recent, “My Great Summer Adventure,” served 70 youth and 40 adults for two consecutive days and looked very much as described in the previous paragraphs of this paper like a project based on a pedagogy of access. Entrance and exit CATS were administered to participants with every single CAT test from entrance to exit showing marked engagement and learning. Please visit: The Experience for CAT test results and comparisons.

Works Cited (and Referenced)

Allington, Richard. “What I’ve Learned About Effective Reading Instruction From a Decade of Studying Exemplary Elementary Classroom Teachers”. Phi Delta Kappan, 2002. SAGE Journals. Accessed online December 2, 2016. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/003172170208301007.

Allington, Richard. “Five Missing Pillars of Scientific Reading”. National Reading Conference. Presentation. 2006.Accessed December 2, 2016. https://readingrecovery.org/images/pdfs/Webcasts/Allington_Handouts.pdf.

Allington, Richard and Gabriel, Racheal E.. “Every Child, Every Day”. Educational Leadership. March 2012, Volume 69, number 6, ASCD. Accessed online December 2, 2016. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar12/vol69/num06/Every-Child,-Every-Day.aspx.

Anderson, James D. (1988). The Education of Blacks in the South, 1860-1935. Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press. Print. P.17- 39, 80-99, 118-134.

Archer, Dan and Finger, Katharina. “Walking in another person’s shoes: Do 360-degree video news stories generate empathy in viewers?” Tow Center for Digital Journalism. Columbia Journalism Review. March 2018. Acessed online July 31, 2018. https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/virtual-reality-news-empathy.php/

Arendale, David R..  Access at the Crossroads: Learning Assistance in Higher Education. Chapter four. ASHE Higher Education Report: Volume 35, Number 6. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 2010. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ887078.

Astin, Alexander W..  “Student Involvement, A Development Theory for Higher Education”. Journal of College Student Development. V4/5. September/October 1999. P518-529. Graduate School of Education, University of California, 1984. Accessed online August 2, 2018. https://www.middlesex.mass.edu/ace/downloads/astininv.pdf.

Author Unknown. The case study method or why experience is the best teacher. Hult International Business School. Hult Blogs. 2014. Accessed online July 31, 2018. https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/virtual_reality_journalism.php/

Boucot, A. J.. Evolutionary Paleobiology of behavior and coevolution, 1990. 257-265.  Accessed online April 18, 2017. https://books.google.com/books?id=wFPgBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA265&lpg=PA265&dq=caninae+canidae+caniformia&source=bl&ots=cPPSZ_DADr&sig=IUXgL6daBpgfyO8KKXRrisqgXf0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjEk5iJ4LvTAhUDNiYKHZODCDQ4ChDoAQhbMA4#v=onepage&q=caninae%20canidae%20caniformia&f=false.

Chen, Eva. The Importance of Universal Design for Learning, Eliminating barriers in the design of the learning environment to make curriculum accessible for all, Harvard Graduate School of Education. 2008. Accessed online, May 21, 2018. https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/uk/08/12/importance-universal-design-learning.

Chomsky, Noam. On Power and Ideology. 1987. 402-467.  iBooks. Accessed online July 31, 2018. https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/on-power-and-ideology/id829682908?mt=11.

De la Peña, Nonny. “Hunger in Las Angeles” MIT Open Documentary Lab. Docubase. 2012. Accessed online July 31, 2018. https://docubase.mit.edu/project/hunger-in-los-angeles/

Eck, Allison. “How do you say “Life” in Physics” Nautilus, 2016. Accessed online June 16, 2018. http://nautil.us/issue/50/emergence/how-do-you-say-life-in-physics-rp.

Freire Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 1970, iBook, 2018. Accessed July 31, 2018. 81-321. https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/pedagogy-of-the-oppressed/id1348889946?mt=11.

Gardner, Howard. Multiple Intelligences, New Horizons. Basic Books. 2006, iBook. 28-45, 145.

Guthrie, John T.;  Perencevich, Kathleen C.; Wigfield, Allan; Taboada, Ana; Humenick, Nicole M.; and Barbosa, Pedro. “Influences of Stimulating tasks on Reading Motivation and Comprehension”. Journal of Educational Research. Heldref Publications, 2006. Web. Accessed December 3, 2016, pp. 232-245.

Hartstone, Abigail. “Study: VR for news prompts empathy, but only with the right mix of factors”. Columbia Journalism Review. March 2018. Accessed online July 31, 2018. https://www.cjr.org/tow_center/virtual-reality-news.php.

Karger, Joanne. “UDL and Improving Education for Incarcerated Youth”. Harvard Education Publishing Blog. April 3, 2013. Accessed online July 31, 2018. http://hepg.org/blog/universal-design-for-learning-and-improving-educat.

Katznelson, Ira. When Affirmative Action Was White.eBook. 2005. P.73, 270

Kholi, Sonali. “Modern-Day Segregation in Public Schools”. The Atlantic. 2014. Accessed online April 22, 2017. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/11/modern-day-segregation-in-public-schools/382846/.

Kozol, Jonathan. The Shame of the Nation. New York City, New York: Broadway Paperbacks. 2005. Print. P.109-124, 215-263.

Ladson-Billings, Gloria. “Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy”. American Educational Research Journal. V.32, N.3. 1995. P.465-491. Accessed online August 2, 2018. http://lmcreadinglist.pbworks.com/f/Ladson-Billings%20%281995%29.pdf.

Macedo, Donald. “Introduction to the 5^thAnniversary Edition”. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Paulo Freire. 1970. iBook. 2018, p16-17, 25-27. Accessed July 31, 2018. https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/pedagogy-of-the-oppressed/id1348889946?mt=11.

Mazzoni, Anders; Gambrell, Linda B.; Korkeamaki, Riita-Liisa.“A Cross-Cultural Perspective of Early Literacy Motivation”. Reading Psychology, Taylor and Francis online, Vol. 20, Iss. 3, 1999. Web. Access December 4, 2016.

McNeil, Linda. M.. Contradictions of School Reform, Educational Costs of Standardized Testing. New York City, New York: Routledge. 2000. Print.  P.xv-xvii, xxii-xxix, 3-6, 153-185.

Meyer, Debra K. and Turner, Julianne C.. “Discovering Emotion in Classroom Motivation Research”. Educational Psychologist, v37/2. June 8, 2010. 107-114. Acessed online June 28, 2018. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227029946_Re-conceptualizing_Emotion_and_Motivation_to_Learn_in_Classroom_Contexts.

National Center for Universal Design Learning. “UDL and Technology”. 2014. Accessed online August 2, 2018. http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udltechnology.

Oldfather, Penny and Dahl, Karin. “Toward a Social Constructivist Reconceptualization of Intrinsic Motivation for Literacy Learning”. Journal od Reading Behavior, Volume 26, Number 2. November 1994. Accessed December 4, 2016. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10862969409547843.

Owen Taylor. “Can journalism be virtual?”. Columbia Journalism Review. 2016. Accessed online July 31, 2018. https://www.cjr.org/the_feature/virtual_reality_facebook_second_life.php.

Owen, Taylor; Pitt, Fergus; Aronson-Rath, Raney; Milward, James. “Virtual reality journalism”. Tow Blog. November 2015. Accessed online July 31, 2018. http://www.hult.edu/blog/experience-is-the-best-teacher/

OxFam. “OxFam Report, February 2018” ReliefWeb. March 2018. Accessed online August 2, 2018.  https://reliefweb.int/report/ethiopia/horn-africa-drought-response-issue-no-09-february-2018.

Page, Kelsey. “I am more than a number: The case against SAT scores in college admissions”. The Stanford Daily. December 2, 2014. Web. Accessed December 1, 2016.

Paris, Django. Educational Researcher Michigan State University. Volume 41, Issue 3, April 2012, Pages 93-97. Accessed online August 2, 2018. https://scholars.opb.msu.edu/en/publications/culturally-sustaining-pedagogy-a-needed-change-in-stance-terminol-3

Reis, Rick. “Educational Theories and Pedagogies, Tomorrows Teaching and Learning”. Message 1249. Standford, Tomorrow’s Professor Postings. Standford University. 2014. Acessed online August 2, 2018. https://tomprof.stanford.edu/posting/1249.

Roberts-Mahoney, Heather and Garrison, Mark. “The Role of Big Data and ‘Personalized Learning’”. Understanding Neoliberal Rule in K-12 School, Educational Fronts for Local and Global Justice, edited by Abendroth, M.  & Porfolio, B.  J., Information Age Publishing, Inc. Print. 2015. Print, P.23-41.

Rose, David. Universal Design for Learning. ACCESS, Colorado State University. 2008. Accessed online May 21, 2018. http://accessproject.colostate.edu/udl/.

Rose, David; Meyer, Anne; Strangman, Nicole, and Rappolt, Gabrielle. Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). 2002. Chapter 4. Accessed online August 1, 2018. http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/101042/chapters/What-Is-Universal-Design-for-Learning¢.aspx

Rose, David. “UDL: Principles and Practice”. National Center on Universal Design Learning. March 2010. Accessed online May 21, 2018. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGLTJw0GSxk.

Rubin, Daniel and Kazanjian, Christopher. “Just Another Brick in the Wall”: Standardization and the Devaluing of Education.  Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 5.2, November 2011. P.94-108.

SantaMaria, Lorri J.. “Culturally Responsive Differentiated Instruction: Narrowing the Gaps Between Best Pedagogical Practices Benefiting All Learners”. Columbia University, Teachers College Record, V111, Number 1, January 2009. P214-247. Accessed June 10, 2018. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ826003

Shor, Ira. “A Luta Continua: Afterward to Pedagogy of the Oppressed”. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 1970, iBook, 2018. P330-336. Acessed July 31, 2018. https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/pedagogy-of-the-oppressed/id1348889946?mt=11

Smythe, Melissa, K.. “Saved By the Bell, Stigma and Salvation in the Inscription of Neoliberal Subjectivities”.  Understanding Neoliberal Rule in K-12 School, Educational Fronts for Local and Global Justice, edited by Abendroth, M.  & Porfolio, B.  J., Information Age Publishing, Inc. 2015. Print. P.3-18.

Spann, Pamela. “The Negative Effects of High-Stakes Testing”. Education, Law, and Policy, Thesis. Loyola University. May 14, 2015. P2. Accessed online August 2, 2018. https://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/law/centers/childlaw/childed/pdfs/2015studentpapers/Spann.pdf.

Strunk, Kamden K. et al.. “Neoliberalism and Contemporary Reform Efforts in Mississippi”. Understanding Neoliberal Rule in K-12 School, Educational Fronts for Local and Global Justice, edited by Abendroth, M.  & Porfolio, B.  J., Information Age Publishing, Inc. 2015. Print, P.45-57.

The London Group. “A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures”. Harvard Educational Review. Harvard Education Publishing Group. Harvard Graduate School of Education. April 1996, V66, N1, P.60-93. Accessed online August 2, 2018. http://www.hepgjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160u.

Tierney, Adrienne and Nelson, Charles A.. “Brain Development and the role of Experience in the Early Years”, 2009. U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institute of Health. National Center for Biotechnology Information. Pub Med Central. PMC3722610, v30/2. 9-13. Accessed online 6/10/2018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3722610/

Tucker, Mark. “Student Tracking vs. Academic Pathways: Different… or the same?”.  Education Week.2017. Accessed online April 22, 2017.  http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/top_performers/2015/10/tracking_vs_pathways_differentor_the_same.html

United States Department of Education.2016 Digest of Education Statistics 2015. Table 219.70. National Center For Education Satistics. Accessed December 1, 2016. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017094.pdf.

Vince, Gaia. “What does It mean to be human?”. Independent Press. 2017. Accessed online 6/10/2018.  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/genetics-ancient-humans-evolution-gibraltar-neanderthals-dna-science-a7615986.html.