CRITICAL PEDAGOGY IN THE SOCIOLOGY CLASSROOM: CHALLENGES AND CONCERNS* Although critical pedagogy has been discussed in the Teaching Sociology literature for nearly twenty years, dialogues about the difficulties in practicing and implementing critical pedagogical strategies in everyday classroom life are less common. In this note, we discuss a predominant theme of our workshop: challenges and concerns that may arise when one attempts to do critical pedagogy. We focus on both challenges and potential solutions for learners, instructors, and institutions of higher education. Understanding what some of these obstacles are and how they manifest in institutions of higher learning goes a long way in devising strategies to assuage their deleterious effects. CATHERINE FOBES PETER KAUFMAN Alma College SUNY New Paltz ALTHOUGH IT IS BY NO MEANS part of the stimulate student engagement. Although teaching canon, critical pedagogy has had a they specifically mention cooperasteady, albeit modest, presence in the soci- tive/collaborative learning and problemology classroom. As evidenced in the pages based learning, and they suggest a moveof Teaching Sociology, instructors have ment away from traditional lecturing to a been discussing and employing critical more student-centered classroom, they pedagogical strategies for nearly twenty never make mention of critical pedagogy. Delivered by Ingenta to : the techniques they discuss years (Ballard 1998; BraaState and University Callero 2006; of NewNevertheless, York at New Paltz can19:12:38 be viewed as integral parts of the critiFobes 2005; Gaianguest 1998;Tue, Gimenez 27 Jan 2009 1998; Hardy 1989; Jakubowski and Burman cal pedagogical classroom. For the purpose 2004; Kaufman 2001; Long 1998; Solor- of this note, as well as for our workshop, zano 1989; Stoecker et al 1993; Sweet we offer the following main points of criti1998a, 1998b). In addition to this body of cal pedagogy based largely on the work of literature, the ASA has published two edi- Brazilian educator Paulo Freire (for a fuller tions of a resource manual titled Critical understanding of critical pedagogy see Pedagogy in the Sociology Classroom Freire 1970, 1998, among his other works; (Kaufman 2002, 2006). The publication of Darder, Baltodano, Torres 2003; Wink the second edition of this resource manual 2005; and the citations listed above): was the impetus for our teaching workshop x Encourages the eradication of the teacherat the 2007 ASA meeting in New York student contradiction whereby the teacher City. teaches and the students are taught; the To some extent, it is difficult to distinteacher knows everything and the stuguish critical pedagogy from other forms of dents know nothing; the teacher talks and active learning. For example, McKinney et the students listen; and the teacher is the al (2004) recommend that sociology departsubject and the students are mere objects. ments incorporate diverse pedagogies to x Promotes a problem-posing dialogue (instead of a banking/lecturing style) that *Please address all correspondence to Cathemanates from the lived experiences erine Fobes, Associate Professor, Department of (generative themes) of the learners. Sociology and Anthropology, Alma College, 614 x Fosters epistemological curiosity in both West Superior Street, Alma, MI 48801-1599; teachers and learners. email: fobes@alma.edu. Teaching Sociology, Vol. 36, 2008 (January:26-33) 26 CRITICAL PEDAGOGY x Strives for praxis: reflection and action of 27 covering and/or recovering their own voices, asking questions, and tolerating ambiguity and uncertainty. Initially, many stuThe distinguishing feature of critical dents are more comfortable with the tradipedagogy is that it is both a form of practice tional model of compulsory note taking and and a form of action. Critical pedagogy the regurgitation of “facts.” Yet our experidoes not only tell us how to teach and ence is that students adapt quickly. As testalearn—much less what to teach and learn; ment, instructors have documented how rather, it also implores us to use our teach- critical pedagogy can help students find a ing and learning to effect positive social comfort zone while exploring a wide variety change. This joining together of process, of topics ranging from homophobia (Little content, and outcome makes critical peda- and Marx 2006) to hip hop culture (Hill and gogy uniquely problematic for both learners Ramsaran 2006). Recovering students’ and teachers. Since there are many exam- voices helps bring them into the fold as coples of how to bring critical pedagogy into learners and co-teachers. Resistance to Professors’ Political Agenthe sociology classroom (again, see citations noted above), we will discuss a predominant das. As stated earlier, a distinguishing featheme of our workshop: challenges and con- ture of critical pedagogy is that it is both a cerns that may arise when one attempts to form of practice and a form of action; it do critical pedagogy. We focus specifically beseeches us to use our teaching and learnon matters related to learners, instructors, ing to work towards a more equitable sociand institutions of higher education. Al- ety. In so doing it is not a value-neutral though we present these in three separate approach to teaching; it is decidedly on the left of to the: political spectrum. But what if sections we certainly recognize Delivered and alludeby Ingenta State of Newstudents York at do Newnot Paltz see themselves as scholar to the fact that they are in no University way mutually Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:12:38 change agents? And what if they do not exclusive. Furthermore, we acknowledge that our brief discussion of these challenges share our progressive social and political merely scratches the surface and does not orientations? Although we may try to frame represent a comprehensive account of the critical pedagogical assignments by encouraging students to work towards eradicating issues or possible solutions. social inequalities and promoting social justice, some students may hold conservative Challenges Concerning Learners Recovering Students’ Voices. Critical peda- perspectives that are at odds with our gogues posit that teaching and learning oc- views. As a result, some students may voice cur relationally through the reciprocal ex- reservations, even resistance, about being change of teacher-student discourses. Such required to work for social change—much an approach mandates that as instructors we less progressive social change. A number of construct learning opportunities that honor workshop participants shared stories of stustudents’ voices, many of which have been dent opposition to this type of action-based squelched by the banking system of educa- learning (see Shor 1996 for a full account of tion. In respecting what students know, we student resistance to critical pedagogy). We can help them link knowledge from the cur- feel that the best way to address such conriculum with the concrete reality of their cerns is to dialogue with students about the everyday lives, and facilitate adventurous purpose and obligation of education. curiosity, risk-taking, and openness to the Through problem posing questions we new (Freire 1998). The main challenge we would ask students to consider the function face is re-socializing students to accept and rational for being in school. Do they these learning experiences. We find that hope to use their education to transform especially in the beginning of the semester, their social reality (such as through getting students may feel uncomfortable with dis- a job)? Does the knowledge they gain the social world in order to transform it. 28 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY through schooling make them act differ- Challenges Concerning Instructors ently—to other people, to other social insti- De-centering Authority. One of the most tutions, or to themselves? Questions such as difficult and paradoxical tasks facing the these may help students recognize that edu- critical pedagogue is breaking down the cation is an inherently active endeavor and teacher-student contradiction. How do we that by pursuing a college degree they are invite students to be co-teachers if we (instructors) begin from a position of intelimplicitly acting as agents of change. Free-Rider Problem. Because critical lectual authority? How do we encourage pedagogy engages students cooperatively, students to take control of their education if assignments frequently involve group work. they know (and we know) that we are still In nearly any group work project the possi- the gatekeepers of the course? How do we bility of the “free-rider” problem exists. allow students (through their generative Free-riders are students who benefit from themes) to establish the curriculum of the group grades without doing their fair share course when there is a discipline-specific of the work. This topic provoked lively body of knowledge we feel compelled (or discussion in the workshop and several pos- are required) to cover? And how do we desibilities for addressing the free-rider chal- center authority when we are working to lenge emerged. First, we suggest faculty gain authority if, for example, we are a meet frequently with groups outside of new, non-white, female teacher? To begin scheduled class time, in place of one or two answering these questions requires that we class sessions throughout the semester. By reflect on our own position in the classroom meeting semi-regularly with groups, the as both teacher and learner. Although we instructor can facilitate their progress by certainly have some degree of institutional and intellectual authority, we can still apsuggestion or direct interventionDelivered (Yamaneby Ingenta to : StateisUniversity York atthe New Paltz classroom as a space to both 1996). A second possibility to raise of theNewproach Jan 2009 19:12:38 share and, where appropriate, negate some free-rider issue with the class atTue, the 27 outset and explain that benefiting from another’s of this authority. work while contributing little of their own Bickel (2006) offers an example of is at odds with a project intended to make “democratizing the classroom” whereby the world a more equitable place. An exten- students, through debate and dialogue, desion of this suggestion is to allow the class cided the subjects they covered, the amount to determine the parameters of what consti- of reading assigned per week, the due dates tutes a free rider as well as any sanctions and page lengths for paper assignments, and that they deem necessary. Further, individ- the attendance policy. As Bickel discovered, ual students in each group can be required by inviting students to assume co-ownership to keep a “work log” detailing the time put of the classroom, instructors may actually into the projects as well as their accomplish- find themselves gaining more respect, and ments (see Fobes and Hefferan 2007). Some paradoxically, more authority among the instructors also build in peer grading as students. Furthermore, eliminating the conanother mechanism to deter free-riders. tradictions between students and teachers Finally, setting up groups according to com- does not mean that teachers no longer teach; patible schedules and shared interests, as rather, it suggests that “both the teacher and well as strengthening the internal organiza- the students know that open, curious question of groups with students assuming roles tioning, whether in speaking or listening, is such as discussion leader, reporter and what grounds them mutually” (Freire meeting coordinator may also decrease the 1998:81). In other words, the goal is not to possibility of free-riding (Yamane 1996). abdicate our responsibilities or to deny and Ultimately we believe the benefits of coop- conceal our knowledge but to create a genuerative and collaborative assignments out- ine space for students to contribute to the curriculum: “to teach is not to transfer weigh the risk of the free-rider problem. CRITICAL PEDAGOGY 29 knowledge but to create the possibilities for many of our teachers, we should tap into the production or construction of knowl- our creativity to transform the means through which grades are determined and edge” (Freire 1998:30). Grading and Assessment. Once we de- assigned. Modeling and Maintaining Epistemologicide to de-center some of our authority we are likely to feel somewhat hypocritical cal Curiosity. We believe that one of the when it comes time to grade and evaluate great misconceptions about discussion-based students. It may seem as if all of our hard (problem posing) teaching is that it is easier work to lessen the teacher-student contra- and less labor-intensive than the lecturing dictions is for naught as the wall between (banking) approach. While it is true that students and teacher is quickly re- different teaching styles may suit different established when grades are assigned. people, there is no denying the immeasurEqually complicated is figuring out what able energy required to be a critical pedamethods of assessment should be used. If gogue. And the number one ingredient that the goals of critical pedagogy are to pro- simultaneously fuels and drains our energy mote dialogue and encourage students to is epistemological curiosity. Freire (1998) name their world so that they can change argues that epistemological curiosity—the their world, how do we evaluate such objec- endless questioning, the awareness of our tives within the context of the substantive “unfinishedness,” the capacity for the becourse content? These issues are not easily ginner’s mind—is a crucial component of resolved and they connect with some of the critical pedagogy. If we hope that students are engaged with the course material and institutional issues we discuss below. Having students participate in the con- with the outside world, then we need to demonstrate struction and selection of evaluative meas-by Ingenta Delivered to : what such engagement looks Statethis University of Newlike. York at cannot New Paltz We rest on our laurels and rely ures is one way to address challenge. Tue, (2007) 27 Jan 2009 on 19:12:38 what worked well in the past. We need For example, Fobes and Hefferan asked students to create a grading rubric in to constantly create and recreate the course class for praxis project assignments. While based on the students in the classroom, the Fobes stood at the blackboard writing down state of current affairs, and our own develstudents’ criteria for an “A” paper and an opment as human beings. If we truly want “A” PowerPoint presentation, Hefferan to be co-learners and co-teachers with stutook notes and typed up the rubric for dis- dents, if we want to mesh their lived experitribution to the entire class. Another ap- ences with our disciplinary expertise, if we proach is to re-evaluate pedagogical goals want to construct a classroom environment and objectives and create alternative means that legitimizes their voices, and if we want to assess student learning. For instance, in to create avenues for them to explore the their class on community organizing, Braa possibilities of being agents of change, then and Collero (2006) adopted an alternative we need to do a lot of creative, critical, and four-point evaluation policy, collectively challenging work to ensure that these goals defined by students through dialogue and are achieved. Franzosi (2006) offers an illuconsensus. One of the benefits of Braa and minating account of the kind of reflective Collero’s model is that “it promotes dia- and resourceful work one must do in order logue and assessment without jeopardizing to become a critical pedagogue. the group solidarity so critical to community power” (p. 10). For many of us, our meth- Institutional Challenges ods of instruction and evaluation mirror the Mundane, Bureaucratized Practices. Hiseducational practices that we experienced torically the institution of higher education when we were objectified students. Instead has operated by establishing mundane, buof relying on the same demeaning, irrele- reaucratized practices that may function to vant, and unimaginative techniques used by discourage critical pedagogy (Sweet 1998). 30 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY As Mauksch (1986:42) points out, “Class creasing bureaucratization of teaching comsize, classroom arrangements, and support bined with the dehumanization of the bankfacilities for teaching activities are based on ing system is that critical pedagogues are institutional policies and practice, rarely on susceptible to institutional forces. One area teacher demands or teacher influence.” For of vulnerability is instructor assessment. example, classrooms may be physically Standardized teaching evaluations, based on arranged such that chairs are set in rows, “measurable universalistic and replicable and are sometimes immovable. Often class- criteria” may lack indicators designed to rooms are not conducive to discussion with assess the effectiveness of key elements of little or no space for small group work. The critical pedagogy such as creativity and infew classrooms that are conducive to dis- novation (Mauksch 1986:46; Sweet 1998). cussion or that do have movable chairs may Further, the tension between teaching, rebe highly sought after and therefore avail- search, and service may be heightened for able only on a competitive basis. Also, the critical pedagogue. As stated earlier, some instructors may have texts and cur- long hours in labor-intensive preparation riculums chosen for them, especially part- and teaching combined with obligations to timers or in departments where, for exam- attend to and support student social action ple, an introductory text is chosen for all projects outside of class may leave less time sections. Centralized control of book or- to devote to scholarship, which, depending ders, filled prior to class meeting dates, on the college or university, is likely to be may deter students’ input into grass-roots increasingly valued in hiring, tenure and curriculum development (Sweet 1998). All promotion decisions (Marchant and Newof these institutional impediments may con- man 1994). We also found workshop participants, or untenured, who were strain an instructor’s capability Delivered to imple-by Ingenta to part-time : State University of Newconcerned York at New Paltz about the repercussions of pracment a critical pedagogical framework. Tue, 27chalJan 2009 19:12:38 ticing critical pedagogy for their careers. As with many of the preceding lenges, crafting solutions to these bureauc- For example, when it comes time for reapratized practices requires time, energy, and pointment and promotion, how do traditioncreativity on the part of instructors. ally-oriented colleagues react to a critical Mauksch (1986:48) recommends shifting pedagogical teaching portfolio? Might inpower from hierarchical, administrative structors be labeled as “troublemakers” for structures to peer initiatives, emphasizing using “subversive” teaching techniques? collegial concern with improving instruc- What if students want to protest social probtion, and cultivating “an environment of lems on campus that jeopardize the college appreciation.” More specifically, Gaian- or university’s reputation? The institutional risks of practicing critiguest (1998:125) suggests finding colleagues from different disciplines in our cal pedagogy became acutely evident to home institutions who share similar peda- Kaufman one semester when his students gogical approaches and then working to- were engaged in a critical pedagogical prowards one area of institutional change “that ject based on censored news stories has a likelihood of success.” Although it (Kaufman 2001). For the praxis component may be difficult to totally free ourselves of their project, one group of students made from the institutional iron cage, these sug- a mini-documentary simulating their cengestions of reaching out to like-minded col- sored story: “CIA Kidnaps Suspects for leagues strengthens our social capital and Overseas Torture and Execution.” In their ensures that we will have a cadre of suppor- dramatization of this story, the students tive peers with whom to face these chal- used fake blood (ketchup) and toy guns; unfortunately, a passerby thought the props lenges. Institutional Vulnerabilities of Instruc- were real. The campus police were called to tors. One of the consequences of the in- the scene, drew their guns (because they CRITICAL PEDAGOGY 31 used to enacting front-stage behavior with assumed the students were armed), arrested students and backstage, only as I am comfortthem, and charged them with criminal nuiable. Here [on the airplane and in the airsance and disorderly conduct. Kaufman ports], students can observe and become privy found it particularly difficult to advocate for to [my] backstage behavior: brushing my hair these students because he was untenured at and teeth, reading my meditation book, listenthe time and he was concerned about how ing to my CDs, watching/seeing me eat. It’s some administrators would react when they unnerving. I want to run and hide and we learned about the story that the students haven’t been together 12 hours! (PP. 10-11) were enacting. Despite Kaufman’s letters and phone calls to campus administrators in As in the case of Fobes, we might not which he suggested that the students should even recognize the extent to which the instibe applauded for their creativity, enthusi- tutional box controls us and provides us asm, and level of engagement, neither the with security until we begin to step outside administration nor the campus police would of it. However, Freire (1998:51-4) calls us step in to drop the charges and the students to expose who we are anyway—as unfinwere forced to appear in court. In the end, ished human beings. No wonder critical the town judge recognized the innocence of pedagogy is unsettling! It is unsettling—for the students’ actions and said their records students, teachers, and institutions of higher would be clear after six months of proba- education. That is precisely the point. tion. For critical pedagogues, the incident CONCLUSION serves as a cautionary tale of institutional vulnerabilities potentially faced when utilizOne of the underlying themes of critical ing transformative educational practices. pedagogy Pressure to Stay Inside the Institutional Delivered by Ingenta to :is that education is much more the Paltz transmission of knowledge. State University of Newthan Yorkjust at New Box. As already described, many professors Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:12:38 Instead of merely inculcating students with (including several workshop participants) feel pressure to conform to institutional “objective” and “value-neutral” facts, figregulations and constraints. At the same ures, and theories, we must recognize that time, we believe that it is an illusion to “education as a specifically human experithink that if we were free of our home insti- ence, is a form of intervention in the world” tutional constraints, all would be well. One (Freire 1998:90-1). To paraphrase C. of the ironies of critical pedagogy is that if Wright Mills, education as intervention is we take our role of professor-as-learner both the task and the promise of critical seriously, the lack of institutional struc- pedagogy (and, we would argue, of sociolture—such as a classroom, hallways, and ogy). For those of us who attempt to bring office—may be daunting, especially at first. critical pedagogy into the sociology classSomething as simple as spending unstruc- room, the challenges and concerns are tured time with students in protests or in many. Understanding what some of these traveling can be disconcerting, in part be- obstacles are and how they are manifested cause we are taking risks of vulnerability by in institutions of higher learning goes a long stepping outside of the institutional box. For way in devising strategies to assuage their example, in a critical pedagogical approach deleterious effects. In both the workshop to a travel-study course in Peru, Fobes and in this paper, we identified some of the (2006) reflects on how unsettled she was major issues of fusing together sociology within the first twelve hours of the trip, and critical pedagogy. Although there are many more issues than the ones we dislong before reaching Peruvian soil: cussed, and although we offered only cursory solutions to some of these challenges, [Traveling with students is] not like the classroom, hallway, or office where I have control we hope that more instructors will be enover how long I [interact with students]. I’m couraged to consider critical pedagogy as a 32 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY sponse to ‘Practicing Radical Pedagogy: Balancing Ideals with Institutional Constraints.’” Teaching Sociology 26(2):116-20. REFERENCES Hardy, Tim. 1989. “Toward a Critical Pedagogy in Sociology through the Use of Drama.” Ballard, Chet. 1998. “I Tried Radical Pedagogy Teaching Sociology 17(2):226-31. Once, But I Did Not Inhale. Response to Hill, Simona and Dave Ramsaran. 2006. ‘Practicing Radical Pedagogy: Balancing Ide“Listening with the Third Ear: An Exercise in als with Institutional Constraints.’” Teaching Demystifying Hip Hop Culture, Power, and Sociology 26(2):121-12. Pedagogy.” Pp. 153-7 in Critical Pedagogy in Bickel, Christopher. 2006. “Cultivating Orchids: the Classroom, edited by P. Kaufman. WashPromoting Democracy in the Classroom.” Pp. ington, DC: American Sociological Associa93-107 in Critical Pedagogy in the Classroom, tion. edited by P. Kaufman. Washington, DC: Jakubowski, Lisa M. and Patrick Burman. American Sociological Association. 2004. “Teaching Community Development: A Braa, Dean and Peter Callero. 2006. “Critical Case Study in Community-Based Learning.” Pedagogy and Classroom Praxis.” Teaching Teaching Sociology 32(2):160-76. Sociology 34(4):357-69. Kaufman, Peter. 2001. “All the News Not Fit to Darder, Antonia, Marta Baltodano, and Rodolfo Print: Using Censored Stories as an Exercise D. Torres. 2003. The Critical Pedagogy in Critical Pedagogy.” Teaching Sociology Reader. New York: Routledge. 29(1):80-7. Fobes, Catherine. 2005. “Taking a Critical _____. 2002. Critical Pedagogy in the Sociology Pedagogical Look at Travel-Study Abroad: ‘A Classroom. Washington, DC: American SoClassroom with a View’ in Cusco, Peru.” ciological Association. Teaching Sociology 33(2):181-94. _____. 2006. Critical Pedagogy in the Class_____. 2006. “Practicing Critical Pedagogy in room, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: American Travel Study Abroad: Teacher-As-Learner in to : Association. Sociological Cusco, Peru.” Pp. 7-13 in CriticalDelivered Pedagogyby Ingenta State University of New York atPatricia New Paltz Little, and Marcia Marx. 2006. in the Classroom, edited by P. Kaufman. Tue, 27 Jan 2009“Teaching 19:12:38 About Homophobia and HeterosexWashington, DC: American Sociological Asism.” Pp. 174-8 in Critical Pedagogy in the sociation. Classroom, edited by P. Kaufman. WashingFobes, Catherine and Tara Hefferan. 2007. ton, DC: American Sociological Association. “Practicing Critical Pedagogy in Teaching Long, David. 1998. “A Radical Teacher's DiGender and International Development.” Palemma. Response to ‘Practicing Radical Pedaper presented at the North Central Sociological gogy: Balancing Ideals with Institutional ConAssociation Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL. straints.’” Teaching Sociology 26(2):112-5. April 4-6, 2007. Marchant, Gregory and Isadore Newman. 1994. Franzosi, Roberto. 2006. “Pedagogical Philoso“Faculty Activities and Rewards: Views from phy.” Pp. 14-9 in Critical Pedagogy in the Education Administrators in the USA.” AsClassroom, edited by P. Kaufman. Washingsessment and Evaluation in Higher Education ton, DC: American Sociological Association. 19:14-152. _____. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New Mauksch, Hans O. 1986. “Teaching Within York: Continuum. Institutional Values and Structures.” Teaching Freire, Paulo. 1998. Pedagogy of Freedom: Sociology 1(1):40-9. Ethics, Democracy and Civic Courage. McKinney, Kathleen, Carla B. Howery, Kerry J. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. Strand, Edward L. Kain, and Catherine White Gaianguest, Kathryn. 1998. “Radical Pedagogy Berheide. 2004. Liberal Learning and the Is Social Change in Action. Response to Sociology Major Updated. Washington, DC: ‘Practicing Radical Pedagogy: Balancing IdeAmerican Sociological Association. als with Institutional Constraints.’” Teaching Shor, Ira. 1996. When Students Have Power: Sociology 26(2):123-6. Negotiating Authority in a Critical Pedagogy. Gimenez, Martha. 1998. “The Radical Pedagogy Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Mystique: A View from the Trenches. Re- dynamic paradigm for teaching, learning, and intervening in the world. CRITICAL PEDAGOGY Solorzano, Daniel. 1989. “Teaching and Social Change: Reflections on a Freirean Approach in a College Classroom.” Teaching Sociology 17(2):218-25. Stoecker, Randy, Mary Schmidbauer, Joan Mullin, and Michelle Young. 1993. “Integrating Writing and the Teaching Assistant to Enhance Critical Pedagogy.” Teaching Sociology 21(4):332-40. Sweet, Stephen. 1998a. “Practicing Radical Pedagogy: Balancing Ideals with Institutional Constraints.” Teaching Sociology 26(2):100-11. _____. 1998b. “Reassessing Radical Pedagogy.” Teaching Sociology 26(2):127-9. Wink, Joan. 2005. Critical Pedagogy: Notes 33 from the Real World. Boston, MA: Pearson. Yamane, David. 1996. “Collaboration and its Discontents: Steps Toward Overcoming Barriers to Successful Group Projects.” Teaching Sociology 24(4):378-83. Catherine Fobes is an associate professor of sociology at Alma College in Michigan. She teaches in the areas of complex organizations, methods of social research, gender, and family. Peter Kaufman is an associate professor of sociology at the State University of New York at New Paltz. In addition to his interest in critical pedagogy, he is currently studying athletes who engage in social and political activism. Delivered by Ingenta to : State University of New York at New Paltz Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:12:38