ヤコブ・ニューマンのクリティカル・ペダゴジー論

―ヘンリー・ジルーとの比較を通して―

抄録

The purpose of this paper is to examine Jacob Neumann’s critical pedagogy theory. In North America, critical pedagogy is led by two scholars―Michael Apple and Henry Giroux. Giroux is especially famous as a successor to Paulo Freire, and there are some studies on Giroux in Japan. However, interpretations of Freire which are different from Giroux’s one have not yet received proper consideration in Japan. Therefore, this paper focuses on the critical pedagogy theory of Neumann, whose arguments are distinctively interpretations of Freire.

Neumann points out that critical pedagogy’s main dilemma is to reconcile one aspect as political activity with students’ intellectual freedom in classrooms through criticism against Bill Bigelow’s classroom practice. As a result, it can be seen from Neumann’s critical pedagogy theory that there are two major attitudes: (1) a positive attitude toward the practice which is inquired by teacher and student dialog, (2) a respectful attitude towards the everyday efforts by teachers combined with an affirmative attitude toward the change in teachers’ everyday slight practices.

Neumann focuses on “generative themes,” particularly in Freire’s practices, which he interprets as a process that involves teachers’ and students’ commitment to learning together through the medium of the world. Also, Neumann considers Freire’s theory and practice to be limited by the situation, apolitical, and to be opened to different discourses in a book-review article addressed to a book written by Peter Roberts who is researcher of Freire.

His attitude toward critical pedagogy and his interpretation of Freire are not aimed at the realization of radical political goals, but at respectful changes in teachers’ everyday slight practices and students’ intellectual freedoms. In this, his attitude is different from that of Giroux. Neumann thinks that teachers can put critical pedagogy into practice through their individual beliefs and knowledge, even though they may be limited by their circumstances.

As mentioned above, Neumann’s argument demonstrates a practical strategy for critical pedagogy that teachers who don’t adopt a radical belief which is similar to critical pedagogy scholars can struggle jointly. Critical pedagogy, which aims for a world in which diverse people can view one another positively, is contradictory if it does not consider teachers who are not “leftist” and students who are not politically active. Critical pedagogy needs to clear up this contradiction in order to change society toward its goal.