anarchist pedagogies
This is a review of the book Anarchist Pedagogies: Collective Actions, Theories, and Critical Reflections on Education edited by Robert H. Haworth.
I think Anarchist Pedagogies created a revolution within my head.
Wait, let me explain. Essentially, I’ve been locked inside my own head. As I’ve grappled with what it means to be a masters candidate in design, I’ve found myself paralyzed when it came to making work for myself.
How do others perceive my work?
Asking questions such as “Is this worthy of a masters program?”
“What would David want me to do with this idea?”
“How should I make this from an academic perspective?”
These questions, as with the many others swirling within a spiral of how to be an “Ideal Student,” stunted my active growth and demonstrated my lack of autonomy within the creative space. I have grown dependent on the institutionalized mechanisms of education that have removed my ability to work for myself, waiting to be told what to do next or where to go.
It is this book that helped me to finally understand and unlock this mindset, and allowed me to create this packet and work for myself. Thus, as it is so fitting with the style of this packet and my new perspective, I will talk first about my thoughts on pedagogy, anarchy, the education system, and where I belong within the mechanisms controlling our lives.
The schooling system, especially within the United States of America, has systematically used its authority and power to create and foster not an education of critical thinking. Instead, the education is found most commonly as a tool at the disposal of the government, intended not to enrich an individual, but force them into complicity in their system. Placed in evenly spaced seats in a small room, students are forced to fit a mold made for everyone, with no regard for their individual learning abilities or preferences.
Teachers enforce rules such as raising your hand to use the bathroom, and not leaving your seat for any reason during class time. The right to speak is granted only by the authority, you may not chat with a classmate or even discuss a relevant class topic without permission. The curriculum is set by the state, ensuring students are taught a perspective that aligns with the thinking of their ruling classes.
The reasoning for this is quite clear; The American public is educated in this way to create a subservient and docile working class. Silent and unquestioning, the average student is taught from day one that the system in which they live and operate is the only true and correct way of being. Any other form of government or societal rule is below the American people, instilling the idea of American Exceptionalism, Individualism, and Nationalism.
The book Anarchist Pedagogies shares multiple essays from critical thinkers in the anarchist community attempting to introduce and provide insight onto the shortcomings of this system of education, as well as demonstrate alternatives educational models that could foster a more free and whole education while emphasizing the role of the educator and the student. However, something you may be wondering is how that really has anything to do with something as radical as “creating a revolution in my head.” To illustrate this, let’s unpack various quotes and ideas presented in the book that have helped me incredibly escape my creative rut.
If you find it hard to believe my claims on the intention of the schooling system to be used as a system of obedience, maybe it would help to see for yourself the words directly from Benjamin Rush. As a signer of the declaration of independence in the founding of our country, and considered the father of American Psychiatry, he would say this in his 1786 document “Thoughts upon the Mode of Education Proper in a Republic.” It reads as follows;
“In order more effectually to secure to our youth the advantages of a religious education, it is necessary to impose upon them the doctrines and discipline of a particular church.
Man is naturally an ungovernable animal, and observations on particular societies and countries will teach us that when we add the restraints of ecclesiastical to those of domestic and civil government, we produce in him
the highest degrees of order and virtue...
Let our pupil be taught that he does not belong to himself, but that he is public property. Let him be taught to love his family, but let him be taught at the same time that he must forsake and even forget them when the welfare of his country requires it...
In the education of youth, let the authority of our masters be as absolute as possible. The government of schools like the government of private families should be arbitrary, that it may not be severe. By this mode of education, we prepare our youth for the subordination of laws and thereby qualify them for becoming good citizens of the republic.
I am satisfied that the most useful citizens have been formed from those youth who have never known or felt their own wills till they were one and twenty years of age, and I have often thought that society owes a great deal of its order and happiness to the deficiencies of parental government being supplied by those habits of obedience and subordination which are contracted at schools...
From the observations that have been made it is plain that I consider it as possible to convert men into republican machines. This must be done if we expect them to perform their parts properly in the great machine of the government of the state. That republic is sophisticated with monarchy or aristocracy that does not revolve upon the wills of the people, and these must be fitted to each other by means of education before they can be made to produce regularity and unison in government...”
Although spoken 200 years ago, these fundamental ideas have never left the school systems and government. The advent of technology and the industrial revolution has even more so created a necessity of this system, as the internet allows more freedom to educate oneself and realized the problems hidden within the core of the education system.
Where does this everything connect?
Coming to the realization that this is the system in which I was raised gave me a whole bunch of questions in need of answering. Over time I found many answers to my existential crisis on my own education within the book, answers which brought me to recontextualizing the entire idea of my undergraduate education. In my undergrad, we were taught the highly capitalistic and economic version of what it means to fulfill the role of the graphic designer.
Classes focused on technical skills and client relationships, projects based themselves around corporate identity and visual communication. This is not to say that these are not important topics to learn, as after all, we still live inside a highly capitalistic system of economy and must find a way to commodify our skills and provides services deemed of monetary value. However as I reflect back on my education, I wonder what, if any, time I had to dedicate to myself or my own mission as an artist.
Personal “styles” meant nothing in the broad scheme, as corporations would look for flexible designer able to replicate what brand or style they already operated within as a conglomerate. What I felt was all to absent at the classroom setting was discussion on the theory and concept behind our ideas. Why did we spend so much time enforcing archaic design rules established and canonized by old white men that claimed that their form of design is “objectified” or “correct”?
Why did we not discuss the greater reasoning behind a decision, the reason behind our choices on a broader level. How do we feel about a specific idea or topic, and how does that affect our design practice? Often we see students falling within the camp of making whatever is “trendy” within the design space, or claims of a love for minimalism and clean aesthetics paired with overconsumption of online design through sites like Pinterest create a homogenous class design style. 20 portfolios walk out of the classroom with the same projects, same style, essentially the same work.
Breaking away from this idea can lead to punishment for experimentation, as what is not considered “good” design can be immediately rejected, students dogpile on the outcast of the class or the student who experimented receives a lower grade for their work(which in itself is a strong argument for the philosophy of ungrading). This creates a tension within the community of the classroom where students find themselves requiring to submit to “authority.” In the words of Joel Spring, a professor and activist writer;
“By attempting to teach automobile driving, sex education, dressing, adjustment to personality problems and a host of related topics, the school also teaches that there is an expert and correct way of doing all of these things and that one should depend on the expertise of others. Students in the school ask for freedom and what they receive is the lesson that freedom is only conferred by authorities and must be used “expertly.” This dependency creates a form of alienation which destroys peoples ability to act. Activity no longer belongs to the individual, but the the expert and the institution.”
This moment, upon reading this exact quote, is when the entirety of my realization had set in.
Throughout my time and experience in education, I had constantly been taught that I must conform and fit within the acknowledgement of authority, be that the literal definition of authority in the form of a hierarchy between student and teacher, or a metaphorical, hidden authority that requires you to create art for the sake of others rather than yourself.
Students are removed of free will and autonomy through this process, nothing is created without the intention of proving worth or receiving validation from some sort of authoritarian figure. The teacher in this situation is not a gentle guide or helping hand to assist the process of learning, but instead the floor manager of a factory, ensuring that quotas are met and the workers(students) are kept in line.
That is exactly where I found myself caught up, as I transitioned to the world of VCFA, a school very similar in pedagogical process to the free schools I’ve been reading about, I had to venture outside of this authoritarian comfort zone in which I had not been required to think for myself.
My decisions were guided not by a pursuit of personal gain and enlightenment, but on whether or not it would be good to include in a packet, and whether my advisor (the authority) would view me as worthy and having met my quota. This line of thinking lead to personal stunted growth and a lack of understanding of how to create beyond the boundary lines. Every project and idea must be “valid” and “worthy”, and the projects must be large and perfectly researched and executed.
Enlightenment and the classroom.
(or, “Where the #$*! do we go from here?”)
Of course, no problem can be solved without the creation of another problem. In the tumultuous time we live in, and with the recent protests and encampments happening across the world at university campuses, we see a rise in dissent and confliction with the narrative told by the US governments.
However, even with the flak the university system is taking for it’s support of openly genocidal regimes and actively being fought against on that front, I still wonder how much ground we can clear in the fight for a more free and desirable educational system at a lesser cost. As someone who will be throwing myself into the fire of teaching at a University eventually, I worry that my research and line of thinking, as well as the pedagogy I am developing, will be seen as dangerous to the overall mission of the public schooling system of America.
Alternatively, I wonder what breakthroughs can be made to implement more of anarchistic and free schooling levels of thinking into a classroom as someone acting within the machine we are fighting against. The definition of Anarchism and the school of thought is so misunderstood within culture and media, viewed as violent and rowdy embodiments of teenage angst and punk ethos. I myself used to believe that as I leaned more towards other schools of thought in my lack of understanding.
What I’ve encountered instead is a truly welcoming community of critical thinkers dedicated to providing freedom and liberation from all forms of oppression. Communities of interesting and caring people who want desperately to make change in the world and recognize the system of oppression and suffering inherent within the capitalist structure of living.
My personal pedagogy as such grows and sides towards these lines of thought as I learn and flesh out what it means to teach in the modern age. Empathy and compassion, as well as understanding and mutualism are essential within the classroom to create an environment where every person is capable of growth and learning.
The act of teaching is also an act of learning, as every new student will present a new challenge or personality you will encounter, but what comes of developing a standoff-ish persona that pushes the students away? Mutual respect in the classroom must go both ways, as the role of the teacher will never stop continuing to be the role of the student as well.
