Pedagogy denotes educational practices and theories involved. The writings of Baroutsis, Glenda and Mills worked to reveal all that comprise in pedagogy. They delivered a concisely arranged work that entailed introduction, pedagogic voice, research, ECC visual arts and curriculum choice among others. A comprehensive discussion on the effectively discussed areas and weak areas are analyzed with elaborations.
Discussion
The authors of Pedagogy, culture and society gave a summarized form of their objective in the initial paragraphs. As indicated in the preface, voice of both a teacher and a student signal numerous things. Misinterpretation is costly and a specific voice conveys a specific kind of message. The authors ventured in an extensive research to ensure viability of their information that comprised of two paramount areas in students; judgment and personal development in school that stimulates the learning process. Denials of the privilege of expression by teachers among the children lead to severe consequences according to Baroutsis. Its effects transcend school to civic life during and past school live. The above description forms a profound discussion on pedagogy among the students whom effective pedagogy enhances and ensure conducive interactive environment by both the teacher and the student. The introduction of the article is great. The main aim of the author is vivid in terms of description of pedagogy and reason that impedes pedagogy. As illustrated in the introductory paragraph, neoliberal reframing in the current society hinders any constructive pedagogies and highlights the key benefits of pedagogy. The authors conducted a superb researched work increasing the reliability of data obtained. There derived numerous information from well renown authors such as the Lingard, the Grek and Takayama among other author. Their objection was based on the current issues on pedagogy as in the first introductory paragraph the reference are from the current researches such as Hursh 2013, Ball 2013 and Rezai-Rashti 2013. This allowed capture of current trend in pedagogy.
The authors gave a profound exploration of their topic. “The way restrictive practices in education operate is purely ironic”. Detailed enumeration of the current issued was discussed. The focus of their subject is broadened to consist of future advantages of effective pedagogy. The writing encompassed all the situations in life ranging from class experience to the society. Moreover, all the related aspects in occupations such as the consumers, reliable leaders, workers, parents and dependable members of the communities base of the kind of pedagogy encountered in tender age of development. The research conducted by the writers involved different states such as the Victoria states and New South Wales in Australia where voice and participation was emphasized. They authors derived their statement from the work of Dewey’s of 1916 who dismissed the high held perspective of engaged citizen’s and a preferred voice. He stressed on an own voice that released confidence and affected positively on the society. The comment was logic depending of Dewey’s research and observation thou obsolete due to decades of changes that elapsed since the work was done.
Vital lessons imprinted on learned lay basis for rapid development in all sectors of development. Engagement in education release confidence in all activities engaged and enables students to view life in differently. With own expression during study according to worked done by Andrews (2010) as documented by the authors student show rigorous participation once a sense of approval is felt. The authors stressed on the importance of personal development and derived much from well renowned authors such as the Ranson book in the year (2000) and Rudduck and Fielding written in the year 2006. They depicted how ‘marginalization derails are proposed development as the young people feel excluded. All illustrated by the citation of research conducted by Geddes in the year 2000 “Non participation intermingled with insufficient accomplishment lead to long term setbacks and alienation from the social political arena”. The authors gave an example of great organization that supports freedom of participation making their work worth of consideration. To further illustrate the solemnity of the matter, some of organizations that support vibrant participation such as Right of Child Convention, an organization of the United Nations was given. Learning proves effective well all the parties work harmoniously through freedom of participation and the children are able to present their disturbing issued on class and curriculum activities such as physical exercise.
The authors exhausted on three specific areas that include ‘voice’, ‘pedagogy and finally ‘engagement’. This comprised of the aspects of learning which involved learning, teaching and the curriculum engagement. Secondary data by the authors such as by Jans (2014) indicated that pedagogic relation among learners and teachers lead to meaningful educations. Numerous sources were used in writing of the books such as the Rudduck in the year 2007 that after research Rudduck found collaborative pedagogy form partnership relationship.
The method and process of date collection was satisfactory. As stated, the research was conducted in Elkhorm Community College in the year 2004 and the duration gave enough time for qualitative methods applications, interviews, photographs, filed notes and observations. The information obtained was valid as all participants were involved and view from all side obtained.
good move because as made it possible to access the target group of learners quickly The career was easily delivered by through gathering the views of Rita, principals, Patrick, Dalton, and Fleur. This facilitates gathering each person’s view of the method being used in education. Such formed a firm foundation for understanding this process using many people’s perceptions. On the other hand, such approach was not inclusive enough as only the views of few individuals were used to get the entire understanding of the pedagogic method. The selected individuals are likely to give their perception that in most cases may be biased.
Rita gives her personal information including the family and working experience to explain what she knows about the school that teaches using the pedagogic method. By doing that, she tried to bring her perception that helped to form the perfect conclusion about the utilization of the method in the school. She started being afraid of exploring new things that are the take of many people in the community. Using Rita to get the general view of the community help to reduce time and cost of doing this research hence making it simpler and enjoyable. Although she gave her personal take on some issues, it can easily be used represent the entire community views on innovation. The community is passionate about the benefits and understanding of how the method is used. She gave what she knew about the process that represent the entire community.
On contrast, getting views from a single individual could lead to the poor representation of community views. Individuals usually have different opinions on the same issue and many people must be included to increase the chances of getting genuine and unbiased information. High representation means higher chances of accurate information. Single sourced information reduced the accuracy of the obtained results significantly. A single individual is likely to give information on her perception or earlier experiences, due to lacks diversity. Drawing conclusion from such data is unreliable.
The writer starts by evaluating the persons and institutional gains of using pedagogic voice, especially among the young children. All advantages of using this method are critically assessed and stated, giving the writer credit in his work. Such is used to encourage students to use the method to enable them to deal with both societal and personal challenges such as self-aware, confident and society injustices. The research avoids avoid writing about senior individuals. It does not state whether the pedagogic method has any disadvantage to the senior members. The difficulties that come with the young people using the method are also avoided leaving many questions. Individuals and institutional disadvantages of using the methods are also avoided.
Ethical issues
The researcher the goes on to explain the benefits gained by the community through including this purpose in the curriculum. Such is done by concentrating on how the outskirts community will react to exhibition performed using this methodology. Issues such as giving the community an identity, and encouraging such community members to become the key to arguing community to emprises on the method. The research carefully avoids negative side of using the pedagogic method in such community. Issue such as negative ethnicity that may result from such process and cost of implementing this plan are entirely ignored. In Addition, the writer starts by showing the advantage of full ownership and participation in promoting classroom practice by enabling young people to become their agents of learning. All other opportunities provided by young people using this method are clearly stated. The writer believes by using the method, more opportunities for the youth will be unlocked that enable young to participate satisfactorily in their learning ownership. The youth will be able to participate to make good care for their environment by making learning more meaningful. Consultation of parents on all issues affecting the students reduces their trust on the teachers. Such proved its opinion on the use of this method.
The author does not give the procedures that will be utilized by the young people to become engaged. The young people ability to become members of useful ideas is also entirely ignored. Procedures for becoming the owner of the entire ideology that is the main challenge is not addressed. How to make the method used is also not dealt with. The writer only suggests the young people can participate in a supportive environment but the possible methods of practice are avoided. The researcher finally decided to use the opinions of Rita to get the effectiveness of implementing this method to students using facilitators. She holds the view that such will effectively implement the plan since the student facilitates the group due to the same level of thinking and understanding. Students are known to value being given the ability to demonstrate. Given the opportunity the will do it the best making the method work successfully and be liked by many students and indicated in the research they reviewed done by Bragg (2007).
The authors do not deal with the issues that are likely to occur due to small age difference among the young students. Some students may pay little attention to facilitators because may doubt their capability is hence deterring the method from achieving its intention.
This paper included interests of students as part of pedagogy voice. Truly, interest is a personal issue that should not be violated. An essence of interest being owned by the students has been shown. Students are said to gain a lot especially being trained to be responsible. Benefits of students’ ownership in learning have been well researched. The paper, therefore, supplies adequate information on the choice, interest, and negotiation in learning. Despite allowing the students choice in learning, it is important to focus on their ability to make decisions. The paper sees the importance of students being motivated to make good judgments. In the case of ECC where students had the choice shows recognition of interest and practice of curriculum choice, it can have demerits…..
Conclusion
The conclusion was well formulated with relevance to the research. Pedagogy voice is essential in schools. As outlined in the research paper, it makes students be responsible and make decisions according to their personal interests. In other words, freedom of choice or democracy is ensured. It is evident that if students' voice is well established in schooling, then great and competent citizens could be acquired from learning constitutions. ECC case has shown instances in which pedagogic voice was helpful to the young learners. Engagement and recognition were facilitated in the arts program. It is important to value the voice of students to be aware of their concerns. However, the extent to which pedagogy voice should be practiced should be monitored according to (Giroux, 1986). Like any other aspect, student voice in teaching has side effects. Students may end up violating their right and hence benefit less from learning. The research paper was organized and written in an orderly manner in most part. It was a depth research on pedagogy voice. However, there was a need for literature review to build the situation. Overall, it tackled the subject of study and contributed much to the field of research.
Recommendation
I recommend additional research to focus more on the disadvantages and the ways used to implement pedagogic voice. The sample size should also be increased to ensure the accuracy of the research.
Funding
The authors gave credit to the sponsor who was the Australian Research council (ARC). This was an evidence of appreciation for the facilitation of the research mostly for the children under the age of 18 years.
References
Andrews, B. H. 2010. “Student Ownership: Learning in a Student-centred Art Room.” Art Education 63 (4): 40–46.
Apple, M. 2006. Educating the ‘Right’ Way. 2nd ed. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Bahou, L. 2011. “Rethinking the Challenges and Possibilities of Student Voice and Agency.” Educate 1: 2–14. http://www.educatejournal.org/index.php/educate/arti cle/view/286.
Ball, S. 2012. Global Education Inc.: New Policy Networks and the Neo-liberal Imaginary. London: Routledge.
Bragg, S. 2007. “‘Student Voice’ and Governmentality: The Production of Enterprising Subjects?” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 28 (3): 343–358.
COAG (Council of Australian Governments). 2009. Investing in the Early Years – A National Early Childhood Development Strategy. Barton: Council of Australian Governments.
Cook-Sather, A. 2006. “Sound, Presence, and Power: ‘Student Voice’ in Educational Research and Reform.” Curriculum Inquiry 36 (4): 259–390.
Curtis, D. D., and J. McMillan. 2008. School Non-completers: Profiles and Initial Destinations: Longitudinal Survey of Australian Youth. Research Report No. 54. Melbourne, AU: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Darling-Hammond, L. 2010. The Flat World and Education: How America’s Commitment to Equity Will Determine Our Future. New York: Teachers College
DEEWR. 2008. Melbourne Declaration on the Educational Goals for Young People. Canberra: Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs.
Dewey, J. 1916. Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York: Macmillan.
EUDEC (European Democratic Education Community). 2011. EUDEC’s Aims. Accessed October 13, 2014. http://www.eudec.org/Aims
Fielding, M. 2004a. “‘New Wave’ Student Voice and the Renewal of Civic Society.” London Review of Education 2 (3): 197–217.
Fielding, M. 2004b. “Transformative Approaches to Student Voice: Theoretical Underpinnings, Recalcitrant Realities.” British Educational Research Journal 30 (2): 295–311.
Flutter, J. 2006. “‘This Place Could Help You Learn’: Student Participation in Creating Better School Environments.” Educational Review 58 (2): 183–193.
Geddes, M. 2000. “Tackling Social Exclusion in the European Union? The Limits to the New Orthodoxy of Local Partnership.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 24 (4): 782–800.
Giroux, H. A. 1986. “Radical Pedagogy and the Politics of Student Voice.” Interchange 17 (1): 48–69.
Grek, S. 2013. “Expert Moves: International Comparative Testing and the Rise of Expertocracy.” Journal of Education Policy 28 (5): 695–709.
Hursh, D. 2013. “Raising the Stakes: High-stakes Testing and the Attack on Public Education in New York.” Journal of Education Policy 28 (5): 574–588.
Jans, M. 2004. “Children as Citizens: Towards a Contemporary Notion of Child Participation.” Childhood 11 (1): 27–44.
Lamb, S., and S. Rice. 2008. Effective Intervention Strategies for Students at Risk of Early Leaving. Melbourne: Centre for Post-compulsory Education and Lifelong Learning, The University of Melbourne.
Lingard, B. 2005. “Socially Just Pedagogies in Changing Times.” International Studies in Sociology of Education 15 (2): 165–186.
Lingard, B., and M. Mills. 2007. “Pedagogies Making a Difference: Issues of Social Justice and Inclusion.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 11 (3): 233–244.
Lingard, B., and S. Sellar. 2013. “‘Catalyst Data’: Perverse Systemic Effects of Audit and Accountability in Australian Schooling.” Journal of Education Policy 28 (5): 634–656.
Lingard, B., W. Martino, and G. Rezai-Rashti. 2013. “Testing Regimes, Accountabilities and Education Policy: Commensurate Global and National Developments.” Journal of Education Policy 28 (5): 539–556.
McGregor, G., and M. Mills. 2012. “Alternative Education Sites and Marginalised Young People: ‘I Wish There Were More Schools like This One’.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 16 (8): 843–862.
Press.